A comparison of seven methods for the inverse modelling of groundwater flow. Application to the characterisation of well catchments
By H. H. Franssen, A. Alcolea, Monica Riva, M. Bakr, N. V. D. Wiel, F. Stauffer, Alberto Guadagnini. 2009
198 citations recorded by the source corpus.
Subfields: Civil and Structural Engineering, Environmental Engineering, Water Science and Technology
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/cb9ff7bfc24aee1df12a6eb45379eef9417a6603
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
In Civil and Structural Engineering
In Environmental Engineering
- F. P. J. D. Barros
- Yoram Rubin
- Philippe Renard
- Wolfgang Nowak
- Denis Allard
- A. Alcolea
- Muhammad Sahimi
- Pejman Tahmasebi
In Water Science and Technology
Citations in the corpus
- Blocking Moving Window algorithm: Conditioning multiple‐point simulations to hydrogeological data (2010, background): “Inverse modeling has become an important focus of research, as revealed by the numerous state‐of‐the‐art publications [Carrera, 1987; Carrera et al., 2005; de Marsily et al., 1999; Hendricks Franssen et al., 2009; Kool et al., 1987; McLaughlin and Townley, 1996; Yeh, 1986].”
- Connectivity metrics for subsurface flow and transport (2013, background): “There is a very wide range of techniques that have been developed to solve the inverse problem [142,143].”
- A hypothesis‐driven approach to optimize field campaigns (2012, methodology): “, 2011], or other conditional Monte Carlo methods based on successive linearization compared in Franssen et al. [2009]. In some situations, analytical solutions and linearized approaches are inappropriate.”