MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Enhancing Remediation of LNAPL Recovery through a Response-Surface-Based Optimization Approach

2009· article· en· W1998338641 on OpenAlexaffabout
Xiaosheng Qin, Guohe Huang, Hui Yu

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Environmental Engineering · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicGroundwater flow and contamination studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Regina
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnvironmental remediationGroundwater remediationEnvironmental scienceComputer scienceTask (project management)Response surface methodologyBiochemical engineeringEngineeringContaminationSystems engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cost-efficient design for remediation of light nonaqueous phase liquids (LNAPL) from subsurface has become an essential task for site managers in North America. Although many related studies were conducted, there was still lack of efficient and computationally attractive method in such an area. In this study, a response-surface-based optimization approach was developed for enhancing remediation of LNAPL recovery. A two-dimensional numerical model was provided to simulate LNAPL transport during remediation. A dual response regression model was proposed for establishing a linkage between remediation actions and system responses. A nonlinear VFPR management model was then established for generating desired operating conditions. A petroleum-contaminated site in western Canada was used to demonstrate the applicability of the proposed method. The results demonstrated that the DRS model could be used as an effective proxy for simulation models and the optimal solutions from management model led to better cost-effectiveness compared with those from nonoptimized ones. The proposed optimization method was computationally attractive and required simple mathematical manipulations. It was of great practical values for supporting site remediation actions.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.406
Threshold uncertainty score0.458

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.006
GPT teacher head0.181
Teacher spread0.175 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations10
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Environmental EngineeringSame topicGroundwater flow and contamination studiesFrench-language works237,207