Talk:Numerical modeling (geology)

Hi Kakitc, here are some areas of improvements I suggest for your page:

1.I think it is great to have some histories about modeling in your introduction, but other then that, I guess the introduction is somehow, detached from the rest of your content. As a reader of a rather complicated topic, I would expect to see something like a prelim to your long and detailed content below. I think it would be good to provide a general outline of the content in your introduction, explaining to readers what are you going to include with your logic behind putting together content this way and very breif explanations to the sub topics below.

2.For the last 2 parts, “Limitation and Errors” and “Software”, I think there could be more explanation. For a total beginner, I guess it would be quite difficult for them to understand just from the short phrases. For like Limitation and Errors, I think you could include some examples. Like for “Simplification of the actual problem” are there any real cases where this happens? What would be the consequences? For the software part, I know that there might be another more detailed article linked, but it would still be really great if there would be some explanation on how the model is used to solved the problem you listed for that software. Maybe just some simple explanation. For example, like how is finite element method used to do thermal and chemical convection of mantle in three dimension.

3.I think your topic would be a rather complicated one, and for really smart high school student to understand, there might need to be some more explanation. I saw that you already linked some specific terms to another wiki page about it already, but if there can be more explanation to the specific terms to your topic it would be a lot easier to read. For example, in the finite element method part, would it be better if you can give more explanation in the diagrams about like this is how you would divide something indicating where’s the node. Another thing is that for terms like stress strain relationship, I know you put down the explanation for stress and for strain, but maybe there can be a bit of explanation about stress-strain relationship, which the meaning cannot be interpreted just from the definition of the 2 words. I saw that you used Hooke’s law as an example, but I guess it is also something rather difficult to understand for general readers. I think a simple explanation first would be really nice.

Feedback from dinohk
1. This is quite a complex topic and it could really benefit more from a longer summary of the page itself in your introduction.

2. It the components sections, interpretation is not a part of a model, it is what you do with the data from the model itself. Perhaps it would be better to have a section demonstrating the steps in creating then using the model, that can include analysis and interpretation in the end.

3. The properties and limitations and error sections will be very difficult to understand for anyone without already having a science background. Try to elaborate what you mean using as simple terms as possible. For example, under accurate in properties, it could be rephrased to something like the following: The solution from the model matches real world data and observations.

Feedback from leonkh
1. Can talk about more detailed examples for different model application

2. Can talk about more on the advantages and disadvantages of different models

3. Can talk about more examples of software and how are they different from others — Preceding unsigned comment added by Leonkh (talk • contribs) 16:27, 23 October 2017 (UTC)

Review from Jupiter
Hi Kakitc.

Your topic is very challenging topic with complex concepts of numerical modelling and many technical terms. Your structure is very clear to introduce the topic. Good use of simulation at the beginning to introduce the topic.

Here are some suggestions:

1. For the "Components", I have check there are actually relationship between those components. May be you can use a flow chat or diagram to show their relationship and how these components compose a general numerical model.

2. Good to include clear equations with definitions. You may want to check your equations again and try to define all the parameters in the equations. For example in "Continuity equations", you may also want to define ∂t or t, as some readers may not know it is representing time.

3. As your topic is complex and technical, you may want to add some real-life pictures of the examples in your text, to make it more lively. For example, the features in "Rock Mechanics".

4. In the graph of "Finite difference method", you may want to colour the labeling text also, as I found it may be a little unclear to use arrows.

Your page will be really benefit with more explanation and definitions, flow chart (a good tool to present a complex concept) and use of helpful pictures. Jupmira104(talk) —Preceding undated comment added 17:25, 23 October 2017 (UTC)

Comments from Graeme Bartlett
Graeme Bartlett (talk) 07:06, 25 October 2017 (UTC)
 * You have used some good references. Can you read French too?
 * The fast Fourier transform is not a basis set. But it could be used to express in terms of a sum of multiples of a basis set.
 * Is there any modelling of earthquakes - either the fracture of a fault or the effect on the surface and human structures?
 * Is there any modelling of magma chambers or volcanoes?
 * Have there been any really exciting discoveries made using Numerical modelling?
 * Are supercomputers any use when it comes to using finer meshes, and what kind of computers are used?  Apart from CPU power are there any other limitations eg memory, storage bandwidth?
 * There are lots of style issues to fix - but these are less important than the content. There should be no links in headings. Bold is only used for the title and alternate names for the article. Emphasis can be sparingly used in italics.
 * I was wondering about your choice of Peter Cundell: is it this person https://www.itascainternational.com/staff/peter-cundall?

Feedback from Tamjwh
Hi Kakitc,

Your page has a very good structure and it gives readers a good general introduction to numerical modeling in geology. Here are some suggestions: Tamjwh (talk) 05:14, 20 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Your description is clear and concise, and the information is adequate. However in the sub-sections “Rock Mechanics” and “Thermochronology” under the section “Application”, it would be better if some paraphrasing is done. For example, in the first few sentences of the sub-section “Rock Mechanics”, you may state the specific types of numerical modeling techniques that are used, rather than generally mentioning that numerical modeling has been used in these areas. It would also be better if you mention the difficulties in simulation after stating the modeling techniques, as the difficulties may be a more technical field to readers.
 * It is good that you have included an example of mantle convection using ASPECT. You may consider adding a timescale in this diagram showing the evolution of the mantle convection with time, e.g. from Precambrian to present. A slower animation of mantle convection would also be good in presenting the mantle interaction.
 * You have mentioned various methods in numerical modeling in geology. Numerical modeling is a powerful tool in estimating the motions and behavior of physical materials. It would be great if you can also include one example from reality showing the similarity and accuracy of using numerical modeling techniques to simulate the scenarios, e.g. a real earth material failure pattern versus predicted failure pattern from numerical modeling.

Review from Jupiter 20171120
Hi Kakitc.

Your page explains the concept and use of numerical modelling has a very good structure, use of simulations and clear descriptions. You have provided a simple description of concept of numerical modeling and introduction of some of the methods (related to the geological application mentioned in the next part) with link to the main pages, and then described the geological application in different aspect with methods corresponding to the methods above. It is very clear and organized. It also avoid overlapping with the main page Computer simulation. In general, I think your page is good enough to explain the general concept of numerical modelling application in geology with suitable level of technical depths for a wiki page. It may be a good idea to include a real life examples/image that matches the simulation you included on the page (for example, the Iceland model we talked about in class or a real image showing the breakage of rock with the modelling.). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jupmira104 (talk • contribs) 11:50, 20 November 2017 (UTC)

Feedback from Wlamwk
Hi Kakitc:

1.	It is a bit difficult to realize “Pecube” is a sub-section under “Thermochronology”, “MODFLOW” is under “Hydrogeology”, etc. when reading through. It appears confusing probably due to the choice of heading size and position under the regional-scale section.

2.	Just a personal preference, since this is such a well-structured and informative page, you may consider adding “Return to top” button at the bottom of the large sections. The steps are described in this page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Back_to_top So readers can go back to the top and maybe search for the table of content easily whenever they want.

3.	Under the limitation section, it mentioned that users may misuse and misinterpret the numerical model. Would there be any concrete examples of common misconception?

Wlamwk (talk) 04:31, 21 November 2017 (UTC)

Review from Dinohk
This is a highly technical topic and it's quite formula heavy, for the average reader the equations will have to be explained in simpler terms and more detail.

Otherwise I think you've done a fairly good job of simplifying the concepts involved to make the topic easier to understand. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dinohk (talk • contribs) 16:52, 21 November 2017 (UTC)

Feedback From Rgwhy001100011
Hello Kakitc,

Here is a suggestion for the "MODFLOW" sub-section listed under "Hydrogeology".

When you describe MODFLOW if you developed the section that touches on the mathematical concepts it could be more digestible for a reader. The picture modeling how groundwater flow you gave is a great find, but I would add a section describing how the water is actually conceptualized when computing the flow of water. I learned to understand the flow of water underground as packages of water. These packages of water are then given a direction and magnitude that are mathematically modeled as vectors. These vectors could then be described in a 3-dimensional coordinate system to conceptualize the overall flow of the water.

If you added a section describing the picture modeling this flow, it would help the audience who have trouble conceptualizing things visually and would help cater to a broader audience. I'm sure that my idea of how this could be written is rough and could be expanded but it is an idea you should consider adding.

Rgwhy001100011Rgwhy001100011 (talk) 17:43, 22 February 2021 (UTC).

Proposal from Reason4dev
Hello Kakitc, hello all,

Based on my latest findings I wish to propose adding a separate section 5.4 Multi-scale:

5.4 Multi-scale

Further geological processes subject to numerical modelling include, but are not limited to: ice sheet advance and retreat, marine transgression and regression, coastal erosion and accumulation.

Simulation of the dynamics of those processes, can be accomplished within the 4F model (which stands for the “form and function of the Frydel factor” model). Models coherent spatial and temporal environment (combining past, present and future) allows reconstruction of the palaeodynamics of Scandinavian ice-sheet retreat (in late Pleistocene) and subsequent development stages of the southern Baltic Sea shoreline (in Holocene), as well as the recognition of the dynamics and extent of future coastal changes (during Anthropocene) based on topography and the linearly extrapolated spectrum of predicted sea levels, determined with the use of representative concentration pathways (RCP) scenarios.

The 4F model uses functions, mainly high-order polynomials, to reflect the state of a process, for instance, the extent of an ice sheet margin or the location of a coastline at a particular time (which is called modelling via polynomial regression). The next step involves executing the integral calculus upon variables and numeric result calculation of the two definite integrals for successive developmental stages. Consequently, an application of formulae enables calculation of the dynamics coefficients, which are inserted into a secondary table (nested table) where transformation of spatial relationships into coastal development dynamics as a function of time occurs.

Notably, the 4F model is scalable and its working principle is universal, so after modifications it permits application in any geographical region, allowing both reconstructions and forecasts, in a specified time frame and spatial range.

Schematic basic model can be freely accessed so as simulation of the dynamics of Quaternary geological processes in the southern Baltic Sea.

https://doi.org/10.1017/qua.2021.64 Reason4dev (talk) 11:08, 22 July 2022 (UTC)