Uncertainty analysis of rising sewer models with respect to input parameters and model structure using Monte Carlo simulations and computational fluid dynamics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Modelling conversion processes in sewers can help minimize odour and pipe corrosion issues, but model uncertainties and errors must be understood. In this study, the Wastewater Aerobic/Anaerobic Transformation in Sewers (WATS) model is implemented in two different frameworks; 1-D (CSTR-in-series) and computational fluid dynamics (CFD) to study the uncertainties due to model parameters and its mathematical form. The 1-D model is used to conduct uncertainty/sensitivity analysis using Monte Carlo simulations. Time-averaged outputs were represented using a general linearized model to quantify the importance of specific parameters. The sulfide formation rate per unit area of the biofilm is the most influential parameter. Parameters controlling anaerobic hydrolysis and fermentation are also significant. Uncertainty due to model structure is studied using CFD to explore the influences of non-homogeneous surface reactions and solids settling. These showed that the 1-D model provides a reasonable characterisation of the process for simple flows in pressure mains.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".