An Application of Hydraulic Tomography to a Large‐Scale Fractured Granite Site, Mizunami, Japan
Bibliographic record
Abstract
While hydraulic tomography (HT) is a mature aquifer characterization technology, its applications to characterize hydrogeology of kilometer-scale fault and fracture zones are rare. This paper sequentially analyzes datasets from two new pumping tests as well as those from two previous pumping tests analyzed by Illman et al. (2009) at a fractured granite site in Mizunami, Japan. Results of this analysis show that datasets from two previous pumping tests at one side of a fault zone as used in the previous study led to inaccurate mapping of fracture and fault zones. Inclusion of the datasets from the two new pumping tests (one of which was conducted on the other side of the fault) yields locations of the fault zone consistent with those based on geological mapping. The new datasets also produce a detailed image of the irregular fault zone, which is not available from geological investigation alone and the previous study. As a result, we conclude that if prior knowledge about geological structures at a field site is considered during the design of HT surveys, valuable non-redundant datasets about the fracture and fault zones can be collected. Only with these non-redundant data sets, can HT then be a viable and robust tool for delineating fracture and fault distributions over kilometer scales, even when only a limited number of boreholes are available. In essence, this paper proves that HT is a new tool for geologists, geophysicists, and engineers for mapping large-scale fracture and fault zone distributions.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".