Evaluating the chain of uncertainties in the 3D geological modelling workflow

IF 6.9 1区 工程技术 Q1 ENGINEERING, GEOLOGICAL
A.S. Høyer, P.B.E. Sandersen, L.T. Andersen, R.B. Madsen, M.H. Mortensen, I. Møller
{"title":"Evaluating the chain of uncertainties in the 3D geological modelling workflow","authors":"A.S. Høyer,&nbsp;P.B.E. Sandersen,&nbsp;L.T. Andersen,&nbsp;R.B. Madsen,&nbsp;M.H. Mortensen,&nbsp;I. Møller","doi":"10.1016/j.enggeo.2024.107792","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Geological models are used for a range of applications relevant for engineering geology and the demands for reliable geological models with realistic uncertainty assessments are therefore increasing. The geological modelling workflow is divided into multiple steps, each associated with uncertainties. Often however, many of these sources of uncertainty are overlooked, which may lead to an underestimation of the uncertainties of the final model. The main reason is that most of the steps in the geological modelling workflow are subjective to some degree. Thus, the possible sources of uncertainty in geological modelling are theoretically infinite, and without a trustworthy conceptual model to outline the expected geological structures and lithologies, the uncertainty assessment of the resulting model will likewise be unreliable. In this paper, we describe the chain of uncertainties in the geological modelling workflow and showcase some of the most important sources of uncertainties through practical modelling examples from two different model areas. The paper also presents and discuss a method to conduct qualitative uncertainty assessment, which is conducted by the modeler and based on expert evaluation and prioritization of the different sources of uncertainty. The practical use of the uncertainty assessment method is exemplified in the last two examples, representing a local-scale and a large-scale model, respectively. All four examples are from Danish geological models that have been constructed as interpretation-based layer-models. However, the considerations regarding the uncertainties in the chain of the geological modelling workflow are useful regardless of the modelling method.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":11567,"journal":{"name":"Engineering Geology","volume":"343 ","pages":"Article 107792"},"PeriodicalIF":6.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Engineering Geology","FirstCategoryId":"89","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0013795224003922","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, GEOLOGICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Geological models are used for a range of applications relevant for engineering geology and the demands for reliable geological models with realistic uncertainty assessments are therefore increasing. The geological modelling workflow is divided into multiple steps, each associated with uncertainties. Often however, many of these sources of uncertainty are overlooked, which may lead to an underestimation of the uncertainties of the final model. The main reason is that most of the steps in the geological modelling workflow are subjective to some degree. Thus, the possible sources of uncertainty in geological modelling are theoretically infinite, and without a trustworthy conceptual model to outline the expected geological structures and lithologies, the uncertainty assessment of the resulting model will likewise be unreliable. In this paper, we describe the chain of uncertainties in the geological modelling workflow and showcase some of the most important sources of uncertainties through practical modelling examples from two different model areas. The paper also presents and discuss a method to conduct qualitative uncertainty assessment, which is conducted by the modeler and based on expert evaluation and prioritization of the different sources of uncertainty. The practical use of the uncertainty assessment method is exemplified in the last two examples, representing a local-scale and a large-scale model, respectively. All four examples are from Danish geological models that have been constructed as interpretation-based layer-models. However, the considerations regarding the uncertainties in the chain of the geological modelling workflow are useful regardless of the modelling method.
评估三维地质建模工作流程中的不确定性链
地质模型被用于与工程地质相关的一系列应用中,因此对可靠的地质模型和现实的不确定性评估的需求也在不断增加。地质建模工作流程分为多个步骤,每个步骤都与不确定性有关。然而,许多不确定性来源往往被忽视,这可能会导致低估最终模型的不确定性。主要原因是地质建模工作流程中的大多数步骤在某种程度上都是主观的。因此,地质建模中可能存在的不确定性来源在理论上是无限的,如果没有一个可靠的概念模型来勾勒预期的地质结构和岩性,那么对最终模型的不确定性评估同样也是不可靠的。在本文中,我们描述了地质建模工作流程中的不确定性链,并通过两个不同模型领域的实际建模案例展示了一些最重要的不确定性来源。本文还介绍并讨论了一种进行定性不确定性评估的方法,该方法由建模人员进行,基于专家对不同不确定性来源的评估和优先排序。不确定性评估方法的实际应用在最后两个例子中得到了体现,这两个例子分别代表了一个局部尺度模型和一个大尺度模型。所有四个例子都来自丹麦的地质模型,这些模型是作为基于解释的层模型构建的。然而,无论采用哪种建模方法,对地质建模工作流程链中不确定性的考虑都是有用的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Engineering Geology
Engineering Geology 地学-地球科学综合
CiteScore
13.70
自引率
12.20%
发文量
327
审稿时长
5.6 months
期刊介绍: Engineering Geology, an international interdisciplinary journal, serves as a bridge between earth sciences and engineering, focusing on geological and geotechnical engineering. It welcomes studies with relevance to engineering, environmental concerns, and safety, catering to engineering geologists with backgrounds in geology or civil/mining engineering. Topics include applied geomorphology, structural geology, geophysics, geochemistry, environmental geology, hydrogeology, land use planning, natural hazards, remote sensing, soil and rock mechanics, and applied geotechnical engineering. The journal provides a platform for research at the intersection of geology and engineering disciplines.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信