MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413340996 · doi:10.22342/jims.v31i3.1964

Implementation of Dual Reciprocity Boundary Element Method to Solve The Mathematical Model of Steady Infiltration in Heterogeneous Soils Vertically

2025· article· en· W4413340996 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Armando Deminto Paa, Imam Solekhudin

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Indonesian Mathematical Society · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeotechnical Engineering and Soil Stabilization
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematicsInfiltration (HVAC)Reciprocity (cultural anthropology)Soil waterBoundary element methodMathematical analysisFinite element methodDual (grammatical number)Boundary value problemMathematical optimizationApplied mathematicsCalculus (dental)GeometrySoil scienceGeologyThermodynamicsStructural engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Dual Reciprocity Boundary Element Method (DRBEM) is applied to Richards' equation for steady infiltration in unsaturated soil. The types of soil observed are Guelph Loam (GL) and Pima Clay Loam (PCL). A mathematical model for infiltration in heterogeneous unsaturated soil is built using Richards' equation and the Gardner model, with GL and PCL soil parameters. The heterogeneous soil types include GL-PCL and PCL-GL, where each soil is assumed to vary linearly in the vertical direction. This study investigates infiltration in vertically heterogeneous soils. Using DRBEM, the numerical simulation results of hydraulic conductivity are obtained as an approximation of the constructed mathematical model. Based on the numerical results of the hydraulic conductivity, the soil water potential values can be calculated using the Gardner model. The results of this study provide the distribution of the water content under steady-state conditions in heterogeneous soils, determined by hydraulic conductivity and soil water potential.

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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.591
Threshold uncertainty score0.361

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.266 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Indonesian Mathematical SocietySame topicGeotechnical Engineering and Soil StabilizationFrench-language works237,207