Advertisement

Journal of the Italian Statistical Society

, Volume 4, Issue 2, pp 167–181 | Cite as

Multigaussian models: The danger of parsimony

  • J. Jaime Gómez-Hernández
  • Xian-Huan Wen
Article
  • 29 Downloads

Summary

MultiGaussian models have the intrinsic property of imposing very little continuity to extreme values. If the variable that is being modeled is hydraulic conductivity and the processes being studied are groundwater flow and mass transport, the absence of continuous paths of extreme values will have a retardation effect in the computed travel times. In the case of radionuclide release of nuclear waste from a deep geological repository, underestimation of travel times may lead to unsafe decision making. To demonstrate the impact of the low continuity of extreme value implicit to multiGaussian modes, travel times are computed in a site similar to Finnsjön-one of the sites in crystaline rock studied in Sweden-using two stochastic models with the same histogram and covariance, one of them is multiGaussian, and the other is not and displays high connectivity of extreme high values. The results show that the multiGaussian model leads to less conservative results than the non-multiGaussian one. Invoking the parisimony principle to select a multiGaussian model as the simplest model that can be fully described by a mean value and a covariance function should not be justification enough for such selection. If there is not enough data to characterize the connectivity of the extreme values and therefore distriminate whether a multiGaussian model is appropriate or not, less parismonious models must also be considered.

Keywords

Rock Mass Hydraulic Conductivity Groundwater Flow Travel Time Fracture Zone 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Alabert, F. G. (1987).Stochastic imaging of spatial distributions using hard and soft data. Master's thesis, Stanford University, CA, Branner Earth Sciences LibraryGoogle Scholar
  2. Andersson, J.-E., Nordqvist, R., Nyberg, G., Smellie, J. andTiren, S. (1989).Hydrogeological conditions in the Finnsjön area. Technical Report 89-24, Swedish Geological Co.Google Scholar
  3. Black, T. C. andFreyberg, D. L. (1987). Stochastic modeling of vertically averaged concentration uncertainty in a perfectly stratified aquifer.Water Resources Research, 23 (6): 997–1004.Google Scholar
  4. Dagan, G. (1989).Flow and Transport in Porous Formations Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
  5. Delhomme, J. P. (1979). Spatial variability and uncertainty in groundwater flow parameters: A geostatistical approach.Water Resources Research, 15 (2): 269–280.Google Scholar
  6. Desbarats, A. J. (1992). Spatial averaging of hydraulic conductivity in three-dimensional heterogeneous porous media.Math. Geology, 24 (3): 249–267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Freeze, R. A. (1975). A stochastic-coneptual analysis of one-dimensional ground-water flow in nonuniform heterogeneous media.Water Resources Research, 11 (5): 725.Google Scholar
  8. Gómez-Hernándeez J. J. (1991).A Stochastic Approach to the Simulation of Block Conductivity Values Conditioned Upon Data Measured at a Smaller Scale. PhD thesis, Stanford University.Google Scholar
  9. Gómez-Hernánez, J. J. andGorelick, S. M. (1989). Effective groundwater model parameter values: Influence of spatial variability of hydraulic conductivity, leakance and recharge.Water Resources Research, 25 (3): 405–419.Google Scholar
  10. Gómez-Hernández, J. J. andSrivastava, R. M. (1990). ISIM3D: An ANSI-C three dimensional multiple indicator conditional simulation program.Computer and Geosciences, 16 (4): 395–440.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Hoeksema, R. J. andKitanidis, P. K. (1985). Analysis of the spatial structure of properties of selected aquifers.Water Resources Research, 21 (4): 563–572.Google Scholar
  12. Journel, A. G. (1989).Fundamentals of Geostatistics in Five Lessons, volume 8 ofShort Courses in Geology. AGU, Washington D.C.Google Scholar
  13. Journel, A. G. andPosa, D. (1990), Characteristic behaviour and order relation for indicator variograms.Math. Geology, 22 (8).Google Scholar
  14. Smith, L. andSchwartz, F. W. (1981). Mass transport 2. Analysis of uncertainty in prediction.Water Resources Research, 17 (2), 351–369.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Winberg, A., Kung, C., Wen, X. andCvetkovic, V. (1990).Stochastic continuum modeling of mass arrival at Finnsjön: Parametric and nonparametric approaches. Technical Report 90-40, SKB, Stockholm.Google Scholar
  16. Xiao, H. (1985).A description of the behavior of indicator variograms for a bivariate normal distribution. Master's thesis, Stanford University.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Società Italiana di Statistica 1995

Authors and Affiliations

  • J. Jaime Gómez-Hernández
    • 1
  • Xian-Huan Wen
    • 1
  1. 1.Departamento de Ingeniería Hidráulica y Medio AmbienteUniversidad PolitécnicaValenciaSpain

Personalised recommendations