Assessing the convergence of LHS Monte Carlo simulations of wastewater treatment models
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Monte Carlo (MC) simulation appears to be the only currently adopted tool to estimate global sensitivities and uncertainties in wastewater treatment modelling. Such models are highly complex, dynamic and non-linear, requiring long computation times, especially in the scope of MC simulation, due to the large number of simulations usually required. However, no stopping rule to decide on the number of simulations required to achieve a given confidence in the MC simulation results has been adopted so far in the field. In this work, a pragmatic method is proposed to minimize the computation time by using a combination of several criteria. It makes no use of prior knowledge about the model, is very simple, intuitive and can be automated: all convenient features in engineering applications. A case study is used to show an application of the method, and the results indicate that the required number of simulations strongly depends on the model output(s) selected, and on the type and desired accuracy of the analysis conducted. Hence, no prior indication is available regarding the necessary number of MC simulations, but the proposed method is capable of dealing with these variations and stopping the calculations after convergence is reached.
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 | 0.007 | 0.031 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".