Modified Green–Ampt Model for Modeling Water Flow Behavior in Capillary Barrier System
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Extensive research studies related to capillary barrier system (CBS) in the literature showcased its effective antiseepage water characteristics for improving the performance of several soil infrastructures. In this study, a series of model tests were conducted to investigate the water flow behavior within CBS. Based on the careful interpretation of experimental results, the water flow behavior in CBS is divided into two distinct processes: infiltration and reinfiltration processes. In addition, a mathematical model is proposed by modifying Green–Ampt’s (GA) model that describes three distinct stages of water flow processes associated with wetting front variation, which are referred to as wetting front development stage, advanced stage, and termination stage. The proposed model is successfully validated using the performed laboratory experiments. The calculation results of the modified GA model show an error of only 3.92% compared with the experimental results, which is significantly lower than that of the traditional GA model. In summary, the proposed model is promising for use as a tool in the rational design of CBS that can be used to alleviate or reduce the impact of landslides, basal erosion, percolation of tailings, and landfills considering the site geological conditions.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".