Integration of Deep Learning and Information Theory for Designing Monitoring Networks in Heterogeneous Aquifer Systems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Groundwater monitoring networks are direct sources of information for revealing subsurface system dynamic processes. However, designing such networks is difficult due to uncertainties in the spatial heterogeneity of aquifer parameters such as permeability (k). This study combines deep learning and information theory with an optimization framework to address network design problems in heterogeneous aquifer systems. The framework first employs a generative adversarial network to parameterize heterogeneous k distribution using a low‐dimensional latent representation. Then, surrogate models are developed based on the deep neural networks to perform uncertainty quantification of pressure heads and solute concentrations at locations of pre‐designed candidate monitoring stations. The monitoring stations are then ranked using the greedy search algorithm based on the maximum information minimum redundancy (MIMR) criterion. In order to depict the importance of each candidate monitoring location, the hotspot maps of the selection probability (Ps) are derived from MIMR repetition results. Comprehensive monitoring networks derived from the hotspot maps are then conducted as the final monitoring stations to improve monitoring information compared to MIMR results. Additionally, nine entropy quantization strategies are compared to evaluate their effects on monitoring network optimization results. Results indicate that caution should be taken when selecting entropy quantization strategies to achieve the accuracy required for model calibration and to improve the efficiency of monitoring optimization. Considering high‐dimensional uncertainties associated with aquifer parameters, the developed framework can provide important insights for monitoring network designs in various earth observational projects.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".