MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3200847465 · doi:10.1002/nag.3262

Methodology for the nonlinear coupled multi‐physics simulation of mineral dissolution

2021· article· en· W3200847465 on OpenAlexafffund
Li Li, Endrina Rivas, Robert Gracie, Maurice B. Dusseault

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal for Numerical and Analytical Methods in Geomechanics · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Mathematical Modeling in Engineering
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaChina Scholarship Council
KeywordsDissolutionNonlinear systemMechanicsBrineVortexFlow (mathematics)GeologyMineralogyMaterials sciencePhysicsChemistryThermodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This article presents a numerical methodology for the simulation of mineral dissolution which couples brine flow, dissolved mineral transport, and cavity evolution. The proposed model considers both (1) the varying density brine flow within the cavity governed by the compressible Navier‐Stokes equations and (2) the evolution of the cavity boundary using a sharp interface model with a physically‐derived dissolution rate equation. The proposed nonlinear multi‐physics model can capture complex flow patterns such as the generation of a vortex in the cavity. The impact of those complex flow patterns on the cavity development can be studied because of the coupling of brine flow and dissolution front movement. The model employs a new strategy to explicitly track the dissolution front, which results in low computational cost for long‐term dissolution simulations. The proposed model is verified through a convergence analysis, showing both spatial and temporal convergence. Numerical simulations of mineral dissolution in horizontal cavities are conducted to investigate the flow velocity, mass fraction of dissolved mineral, cavity shape evolution, and dissolution rate over time. Additionally, a discussion on the effect of Peclet number on mineral dissolution in the cavity is undertaken.

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)0.001
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.127
GPT teacher head0.452
Teacher spread0.324 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations15
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal for Numerical and Analytical Methods in GeomechanicsSame topicAdvanced Mathematical Modeling in EngineeringFrench-language works237,207