Effect of interface transmissivity and hydraulic conductivity on contaminant migration through composite liners with wrinkles or failed seams
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The leakage and the peak chloride concentration in an aquifer for a single composite liner facility is modelled for (i) a hole in a geomembrane wrinkle and (ii) a failed seam. A method using a closed-form solution to calculate leakage together with a l½-dimensional (l½D) semi-analytic contaminant transport model is proposed, and the results compared with those obtained from two-dimensional (2D) finite element modelling (FEM). Leakage is shown to be highly dependent on the interaction between the interface transmissivity (θ) and hydraulic conductivity beneath the wrinkle (k b ). Similar leakages arising from different combinations of transmissivity and hydraulic conductivity are shown to have significantly different impacts on an underlying aquifer. Contaminant transport modelling is needed to assess this effect for the likely range of uncertainty regarding interface transmissivity (θ) and hydraulic conductivity. The 2D FEM is conceptually more comprehensive; however, using conventional software only a very limited size of problem could be accurately modeled given the greatly different scales that must be modelled. In contrast, the semi-analytic 1½D approach readily allowed consideration of the highly variable scales, and gave results at the down-gradient edge sufficiently similar to the 2D approach.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".