MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2943981462 · doi:10.3390/min9050282

Mathematical Modelling of Fault Reactivation Induced by Water Injection

2019· article· en· W2943981462 on OpenAlexafffund
T.S. Nguyen, Yves Guglielmi, Bastian Graupner, Jonny Rutqvist

Bibliographic record

VenueMinerals · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
Topicearthquake and tectonic studies
Canadian institutionsCanadian Nuclear Safety Commission
FundersLawrence Berkeley National LaboratoryCanadian Nuclear Safety CommissionOffice of ScienceEidgenössisches NuklearsicherheitsinspektoratInstitut de Radioprotection et de SÛreté NucléaireKorea Atomic Energy Research InstituteJapan Atomic Energy AgencyOffice of Nuclear EnergyNuclear Waste Management OrganizationU.S. Department of Energy
KeywordsFault (geology)Permeability (electromagnetism)Pore water pressureRadioactive wasteGeologyInduced seismicityShear (geology)Geotechnical engineeringPetrologySeismologyEngineeringChemistryWaste management

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Faults in the host rock that might exist in the vicinity of deep geological repositories for radioactive waste, constitute potential enhanced pathways for radionuclide migration. Several processes might trigger pore pressure increases in the faults leading to fault failure and induced seismicity, and increase the faults’ permeability. In this research, we developed a mathematical model to simulate fault activation during an experiment of controlled water injection in a fault at the Mont-Terri Underground Research Laboratory in Switzerland. The effects of in-situ stress, fault shear strength parameters and heterogeneity are assessed. It was shown that the above factors are critical and need to be adequately characterized in order to predict the faults’ hydro-mechanical behaviour.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.188 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations20
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMineralsSame topicearthquake and tectonic studiesFrench-language works237,207