MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3005956997 · doi:10.3390/w12020505

A Deterministic Monte Carlo Simulation Framework for Dam Safety Flow Control Assessment

2020· article· en· W3005956997 on OpenAlexaff
Leanna M. King, Slobodan P. Simonović

Bibliographic record

VenueWater · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWater resources management and optimization
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMonte Carlo methodCriticalityComputer scienceRare eventsStochastic simulationMathematical optimizationReliability engineeringEngineeringMathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Simulation has become more widely applied for analysis of dam safety flow control in recent years. Stochastic simulation has proven to be a useful tool that allows for easy estimation of the overall probability of dam overtopping failure. However, it is difficult to analyze “uncommon combinations of events” with a stochastic approach given current computing abilities, because (a) the likelihood of these combinations of events is small, and (b) there may not be enough simulated instances of these rare scenarios to determine their criticality. In this research, a Deterministic Monte Carlo approach is presented, which uses an exhaustive list of possible combinations of events (scenarios) as a deterministic input. System dynamics simulation is used to model the dam system interactions so that low-level events within the system can be propagated through the model to determine high-level system outcomes. Monte Carlo iterations are performed for each input scenario. A case study is presented with results from a single example scenario to demonstrate how the simulation framework can be used to estimate the criticality parameters for each combination of events simulated. The approach can analyze these rare events in a thorough and systematic way, providing a better coverage of the possibility space as well as valuable insights into system vulnerabilities.

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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.968
Threshold uncertainty score0.339

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.223 · 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

Citations12
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWaterSame topicWater resources management and optimizationFrench-language works237,207