Dispersion of a fluid plume during radial injection in an aquifer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study outlines a model for injected fluid flow in a vertically confined porous aquifer with mechanical dispersion. Existing studies have investigated the behaviour and geometry of immiscible fluid flow in this setting, where the injected fluid displaces the resident fluid, forming a sharp interface between the two. The present study extends analytical solutions to include mechanical dispersion of the interface. The solutions are inverted to solve for time as a function of position (r,z), giving each position in the aquifer an intersection time corresponding to the moment the travelling interface intersects a point of interest. The set of (r0,z0) positions which share an intersection time are treated as dummy variables that represent an 'effective surface' and are integrated over to solve for the velocity field within the aquifer. Using this velocity field, the concentration profile resulting from mechanical dispersion can be found analytically.It is shown that the concentration of the injected fluid smoothly decays around the position of the interface from immiscible solutions, allowing for the injected fluid to be present in detectable quantities beyond the extent of these interfaces. This concentration spread should be considered in defining outer boundaries on fluids in injection well applications such as carbon capture and storage or groundwater applications.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".