MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2801061054 · doi:10.1029/2017wr022286

An Analytical Stochastic Approach for Evaluating the Performance of Combined Sewer Overflow Tanks

2018· article· en· W2801061054 on OpenAlexafffund
Jun Wang, Yiping Guo

Bibliographic record

VenueWater Resources Research · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicUrban Stormwater Management Solutions
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaChina Scholarship Council
KeywordsCombined sewerProbabilistic logicComputer scienceSurface runoffStorm Water Management ModelStormwaterStorage tankMathematical optimizationEngineeringMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Storm water detention tanks are widely used for the control of combined sewer overflows. Conventional continuous simulation and recently developed analytical probabilistic models have been used for analyzing the hydrologic operation of storm water detention tanks. These analyses are necessary in order to accurately estimate the runoff capture efficiency of a given control system or the required storage capacity for achieving a desired runoff capture efficiency. The analytical probabilistic models still have the shortcomings of making simplifying assumptions about the initial storage conditions of a detention tank. Developed in this study is a new stochastic analysis method which can provide similar results as provided by continuous simulations and overcome some of the shortcomings of the previously developed analytical probabilistic models. This stochastic analysis method uses closed‐form analytical equations to estimate the runoff capture efficiency and required storage capacity. Results from these analytical equations are validated by comparing with continuous simulation results and close agreements are observed. These analytical equations are therefore proposed as a computationally efficient alternative for analyzing the hydrologic performance of combined sewer overflow tanks.

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)0.003
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.726
Threshold uncertainty score0.937

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.107
GPT teacher head0.372
Teacher spread0.265 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations33
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWater Resources ResearchSame topicUrban Stormwater Management SolutionsFrench-language works237,207