Articles | Volume 15, issue 12
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-4689-2022
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-4689-2022
Methods for assessment of models
 | 
20 Jun 2022
Methods for assessment of models |  | 20 Jun 2022

loopUI-0.1: indicators to support needs and practices in 3D geological modelling uncertainty quantification

Guillaume Pirot, Ranee Joshi, Jérémie Giraud, Mark Douglas Lindsay, and Mark Walter Jessell

Related authors

GraphFlow v1.0: approximating groundwater contaminant transport with graph-based methods – an application to fault scenario selection
Léonard Moracchini, Guillaume Pirot, Kerry Bardot, Mark W. Jessell, and James L. McCallum
Geosci. Model Dev. Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-2024-154,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-2024-154, 2024
Preprint under review for GMD
Short summary
Modelling subglacial fluvial sediment transport with a graph-based model, Graphical Subglacial Sediment Transport (GraphSSeT)
Alan Robert Alexander Aitken, Ian Delaney, Guillaume Pirot, and Mauro A. Werder
The Cryosphere, 18, 4111–4136, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-18-4111-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-18-4111-2024, 2024
Short summary
Blockworlds 0.1.0: a demonstration of anti-aliased geophysics for probabilistic inversions of implicit and kinematic geological models
Richard Scalzo, Mark Lindsay, Mark Jessell, Guillaume Pirot, Jeremie Giraud, Edward Cripps, and Sally Cripps
Geosci. Model Dev., 15, 3641–3662, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-3641-2022,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-3641-2022, 2022
Short summary
Into the Noddyverse: a massive data store of 3D geological models for machine learning and inversion applications
Mark Jessell, Jiateng Guo, Yunqiang Li, Mark Lindsay, Richard Scalzo, Jérémie Giraud, Guillaume Pirot, Ed Cripps, and Vitaliy Ogarko
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 14, 381–392, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-14-381-2022,https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-14-381-2022, 2022
Short summary
dh2loop 1.0: an open-source Python library for automated processing and classification of geological logs
Ranee Joshi, Kavitha Madaiah, Mark Jessell, Mark Lindsay, and Guillaume Pirot
Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 6711–6740, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-6711-2021,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-6711-2021, 2021
Short summary

Related subject area

Climate and Earth system modeling
Impact of ocean vertical-mixing parameterization on Arctic sea ice and upper-ocean properties using the NEMO-SI3 model
Sofia Allende, Anne Marie Treguier, Camille Lique, Clément de Boyer Montégut, François Massonnet, Thierry Fichefet, and Antoine Barthélemy
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 7445–7466, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-7445-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-7445-2024, 2024
Short summary
Bridging the gap: a new module for human water use in the Community Earth System Model version 2.2.1
Sabin I. Taranu, David M. Lawrence, Yoshihide Wada, Ting Tang, Erik Kluzek, Sam Rabin, Yi Yao, Steven J. De Hertog, Inne Vanderkelen, and Wim Thiery
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 7365–7399, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-7365-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-7365-2024, 2024
Short summary
A new lightning scheme in the Canadian Atmospheric Model (CanAM5.1): implementation, evaluation, and projections of lightning and fire in future climates
Cynthia Whaley, Montana Etten-Bohm, Courtney Schumacher, Ayodeji Akingunola, Vivek Arora, Jason Cole, Michael Lazare, David Plummer, Knut von Salzen, and Barbara Winter
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 7141–7155, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-7141-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-7141-2024, 2024
Short summary
Methane dynamics in the Baltic Sea: investigating concentration, flux, and isotopic composition patterns using the coupled physical–biogeochemical model BALTSEM-CH4 v1.0
Erik Gustafsson, Bo G. Gustafsson, Martijn Hermans, Christoph Humborg, and Christian Stranne
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 7157–7179, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-7157-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-7157-2024, 2024
Short summary
Split-explicit external mode solver in the finite volume sea ice–ocean model FESOM2
Tridib Banerjee, Patrick Scholz, Sergey Danilov, Knut Klingbeil, and Dmitry Sidorenko
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 7051–7065, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-7051-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-7051-2024, 2024
Short summary

Cited articles

Ahmed, N., Natarajan, T., and Rao, K. R.: Discrete cosine transform, IEEE T. Comput., 100, 90–93, 1974. a
Ailleres, L.: The Loop 3D stochastic geological modelling platform – development and applications, GMD Special Issue, https://gmd.copernicus.org/articles/special_issue1142.html (last access: 8 June 2022), data available at: https://loop3d.github.io/ (last access: 8 June 2022), 2020. a
Boisvert, J. B., Pyrcz, M. J., and Deutsch, C. V.: Multiple point metrics to assess categorical variable models, Nat. Resour. Res., 19, 165–175, 2010. a, b
Chen, M., Tompson, A. F., Mellors, R. J., and Abdalla, O.: An efficient optimization of well placement and control for a geothermal prospect under geological uncertainty, Appl. Energ., 137, 352–363, 2015. a
Dagan, I., Lee, L., and Pereira, F.: Similarity-based methods for word sense disambiguation, in: Proceedings of the 35th ACL/8th EACL, arXiv preprint, 56–63, https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.cmp-lg/9708010, 1997. a, b, c
Download
Short summary
Results of a survey launched among practitioners in the mineral industry show that despite recognising the importance of uncertainty quantification it is not very well performed due to lack of data, time requirements, poor tracking of interpretations and relative complexity of uncertainty quantification. To alleviate the latter, we provide an open-source set of local and global indicators to measure geological uncertainty among an ensemble of geological models.