MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4327714851 · doi:10.3390/w15061156

Estimation of Aquifer Storativity Using 3D Geological Modeling and the Spatial Random Bagging Simulation Method: The Saskatchewan River Basin Case Study (Central Canada)

2023· article· en· W4327714851 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Mohamed Hamdi, Kalifa Goı̈ta

Bibliographic record

VenueWater · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicGroundwater flow and contamination studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsAquiferGeologyGroundwaterStructural basinContext (archaeology)HydrogeologyHydrology (agriculture)Hydraulic conductivityAquifer propertiesGroundwater rechargeEnvironmental scienceGeomorphologySoil scienceGeotechnical engineeringPaleontology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Hydrosystems in the Saskatchewan River Basin of the Canadian Prairies are subject to natural and socioeconomic pressures. Increasingly, these strong pressures are exacerbating problems of water resource accessibility and depletion. Unfortunately, the geometric heterogeneity of the aquifers and the presence of lithologically varied layers complicate groundwater flow studies, hydrodynamic characterization, and aquifer storativity calculations. Moreover, in recent hydrogeological studies, hydraulic conductivity has been the subject of much more research than storativity. It is in this context that the present research was conducted, to establish a 3D hydrostratigraphic model that highlights the geological (lithology, thickness, and depth) and hydrodynamic characteristics of the aquifer formations and proposes a new uncertainty framework for groundwater storage estimation. The general methodology is based on collecting and processing a very fragmentary and diverse multi-source database to develop the conceptual model. Data were harmonized and entered into a common database management system. A large quantity of geological information has been implemented in a 3D hydrostratigraphic model to establish the finest geometry of the SRB aquifers. Then, the different sources of uncertainty were controlled and considered in the modeling process by developing a randomized modeling system based on spatial random bagging simulation (SRBS). The results of the research show the following: Firstly, the distribution of aquifer levels is controlled by tectonic activity and erosion, which further suggests that most buried valleys on the Prairies have filled over time, likely during multiple glaciations in several depositional environments. Secondly, the geostatistical study allowed us to choose optimal interpolation variographic parameters. Finally, the final storativity maps of the different aquifer formations showed a huge potential of groundwater in SRB. The SRBS method allowed us to calculate the optimal storativity values for each mesh and to obtain a final storativity map for each formation. For example, for the Paskapoo Formation, the distribution grid of groundwater storage shows that the east part of the aquifer can store up to 5920 × 103 m3/voxel, whereas most areas of the west aquifer part can only store less than 750 × 103 m3/voxel. The maximum storativity was attributed to the Horseshoe Canyon Formation, which contains maximal geological reserves ranging from 107 to 111 × 109 m3. The main contribution of this research is the proposed 3D geological model with hydrogeological insights into the study area, as well as the use of a new statistical method to propagate the uncertainty over the modeling domain. The next step will focus on the hydrodynamic modeling of groundwater flow to better manage water resources in the Saskatchewan River Basin.

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)0.001
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.315
Threshold uncertainty score0.645

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.241 · 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

Citations10
Published2023
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWaterSame topicGroundwater flow and contamination studiesFrench-language works237,207