ISSN:
1745-6584
Source:
Blackwell Publishing Journal Backfiles 1879-2005
Topics:
Energy, Environment Protection, Nuclear Power Engineering
,
Geosciences
Notes:
Many sites of ground water contamination rely heavily on complex numerical models of flow and transport to develop closure plans. This complexity has created a need for tools and approaches that can build confidence in model predictions and provide evidence that these predictions are sufficient for decision making. Confidence building is a long-term, iterative process and the author believes that this process should be termed model validation. Model validation is a process, not an end result. That is, the process of model validation cannot ensure acceptable prediction or quality of the model. Rather, it provides an important safeguard against faulty models or inadequately developed and tested models. If model results become the basis for decision making, then the validation process provides evidence that the model is valid for making decisions (not necessarily a true representation of reality). Validation, verification, and confirmation are concepts associated with ground water numerical models that not only do not represent established and generally accepted practices, but there is not even widespread agreement on the meaning of the terms as applied to models. This paper presents a review of model validation studies that pertain to ground water flow and transport modeling. Definitions, literature debates, previously proposed validation strategies, and conferences and symposia that focused on subsurface model validation are reviewed and discussed. The review is general and focuses on site-specific, predictive ground water models used for making decisions regarding remediation activities and site closure. The aim is to provide a reasonable starting point for hydrogeologists facing model validation for ground water systems, thus saving a significant amount of time, effort, and cost. This review is also aimed at reviving the issue of model validation in the hydrogeologic community and stimulating the thinking of researchers and practitioners to develop practical and efficient tools for evaluating and refining ground water predictive models.
Type of Medium:
Electronic Resource
URL:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-6584.2004.tb02674.x
Permalink
