Pathline Density Distributions in a Null‐Space Monte Carlo Approach to Assess Groundwater Pathways
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A null-space Monte-Carlo (NSMC) approach was applied to account for uncertainty in the calibration of the hydraulic conductivity (K) field for a three-dimensional groundwater flow model of a major water supply system in Switzerland. The approach generates different parameter realizations of the K field using the pilot point methodology. Subsequently, particle tracking (PT) was applied to each calibrated model, and the resulting particles are interpreted as the spatial pathline density distribution of multiple sources. The adopted approach offers advantages over classical PT which does not provide a means for treating uncertainty originating from the incomplete description of subsurface heterogeneity. Uncertainty in the K field is shown to strongly influence the spatial pathline distribution. Pathline spreading is particularly evident in locations where the information content of the head observations does not sufficiently constrain the estimated parameters. Despite the predictive uncertainty, the pumped drinking water at the study site is most likely dominated by artificially-infiltrated groundwater originating from the local infiltration canals. The model suggests that within the well field, the central pumping wells could be extracting regional groundwater, although the probability is relatively low. Nevertheless, a rigorous uncertainty assessment is still required since only a few realizations resulted in flow paths that support the field observations. Model results should therefore not be based on only one model realization; rather, an uncertainty analysis should be carried out to provide a sufficiently large suite of equally probable simulations that include all potential sources and pathways.
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 | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".