MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2006640036 · doi:10.1002/nag.477

Investigation of a modified sequential iteration approach for solving coupled reactive transport problems

2005· article· en· W2006640036 on OpenAlexaff
David J. Z. Chen, Kerry T. B. MacQuarrie

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal for Numerical and Analytical Methods in Geomechanics · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicRadioactive element chemistry and processing
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
Fundersnot available
KeywordsApplied mathematicsComputer scienceMathematical optimizationCalculus (dental)Mathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

When contaminants enter the soil or groundwater, they may interact physically, geochemically and biochemically with the native water, microorganisms and solid matrix. A realistic description of a reactive transport regime that includes these processes requires joint consideration of multiple chemical species. Currently there are three common numerical approaches for coupling multispecies reaction and solute transport: the one-step approach, the sequential non-iterative approach (SNIA), and the sequential iterative approach (SIA). A modification of the SNIA method is the Strang-splitting method. In this study, a new modified sequential iteration approach (MSIA) for solving multicomponent reactive transport in steady state groundwater flow is presented. This coupling approach has been applied to two realistic reactive transport problems and its performance compared with the SIA and the Strang-splitting methods. The comparison shows that MSIA consistently converges faster than the other two coupling schemes. For the simulation of nitrogen and related species transport and reaction in a riparian aquifer, the total CPU time required by MSIA is only about 38% of the total CPU time required by the SIA, and only 50% of the CPU time required by the Strang-splitting method. The test problem results indicate that the SIA has superior accuracy, while the accuracy of MSIA is marginally better than that of the Strang-splitting method. The overall performance of MSIA is considered to be good, especially for simulations in which computational time is a critical factor. Copyright © 2005 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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)0.001
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.844
Threshold uncertainty score0.544

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.068
GPT teacher head0.376
Teacher spread0.307 · 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 designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations4
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal for Numerical and Analytical Methods in GeomechanicsSame topicRadioactive element chemistry and processingFrench-language works237,207