Modeling of the thermohydromechanical–chemical response of Ontario sedimentary rocks to future glaciations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this work, the response of a proposed deep geological repository (DGR), located in sedimentary rock formations of southern Ontario, to potential future glaciation cycles is investigated numerically. A coupled thermohydromechanical–chemical model is developed and solved numerically by using the finite element method. The general circulation model (GCM) from the University of Toronto is used to generate future glacial cycles and related surface boundary conditions based on the past 120 000 years of glacial history. The geometry of the hypothetical DGR is adopted from the proposed design. Two types of vertical shaft conditions, effective and failed, are included and investigated in this study. For the case with effective vertical shafts, the results show that the potential radioactive solute transport is diffusion-dominated and the transport distance is contained within natural barriers. However, the results for the case of a shaft seal failure show that future glaciations could potentially lead to significant advection transport of radionuclides from the level of the DGR to the shallow ground water horizons. From a safety perspective, the shaft structure is concluded to be a critical part of the DGR system and needs to be considered as an important factor in safety assessments and future research.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".