MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Modeling the Time Variation of Reservoir Trap Efficiency

2010· article· en· W2029490203 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Hydrologic Engineering · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrological Forecasting Using AI
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAGE-WELL
KeywordsInflowEmpirical modellingSoft computingTrap (plumbing)Genetic programmingReservoir modelingComputer scienceSedimentationReservoir computingArtificial neural networkDeposition (geology)Genetic algorithmHydrology (agriculture)Soil scienceSedimentGeologyEnvironmental sciencePetroleum engineeringMachine learningGeotechnical engineeringGeomorphologySimulationEnvironmental engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

All reservoirs are subjected to sediment inflow and deposition to a certain extent resulting in reduction of their capacity. Trap efficiency (Te), a most important parameter for reservoir sedimentation studies, is being estimated using conventional empirical methods till today. A limited research has been carried out on estimating the variation of Te with time. In the present study, an attempt has been made to incorporate the age of the reservoir to estimate the Te. This study investigates the suitability of conventional empirical approaches along with soft computing data-driven techniques to estimate the reservoir Te. The incorporation of reservoir age, in empirical model, has resulted in a better Te estimation. Further, to estimate Te at different time steps, soft computing approaches such as artificial neural networks (ANNs) and genetic programming (GP) have been attempted. Based on correlation analysis, it was found that ANN model (4–4-1) resulted better than conventional empirical methods but inferior to GP. The results show that the GP model is parsimonious and understandable and is well suited to estimate Te of a large reservoir.

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.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.214
Threshold uncertainty score0.342

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
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 integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.205
Teacher spread0.195 · 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