Comment on “Modeling groundwater flow with random hydraulic conductivity using radial basis function partition of unity method” by Shile et al. (2024)

The goal of this article is to explain some striking discrepancies between the Monte Carlo inferences for flow in heterogeneous aquifers presented in (Shile et al., 2024) and reliable and verifiable results previously published. Comparisons with statistical inferences done within the same numerical setup and using the same benchmark codes demonstrate that quantifiable aspects, such as a too small departure from the linear theory and the decrease of the standard deviations with the increase of the aquifer heterogeneity, cannot be produced with the tools used by the authors. • Monte Carlo results of Shile et al. (2024) are compared to previously published ones. • Comparisons are also made with other methods for the same groundwater-flow benchmark. • Striking discrepancy with reliable and verifiable results indicate data fabrication.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Engineering Analysis with Boundary Elements
Published
2024-09-16
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enganabound.2024.105963
Primary Topic
Groundwater flow and contamination studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Comment on “Modeling groundwater flow with random hydraulic conductivity using radial basis function partition of unity method” by Shile et al. (2024)

Nicolae Suciu
Engineering Analysis with Boundary Elements
Groundwater flow and contamination studies
article

Comment on “Modeling groundwater flow with random hydraulic conductivity using radial basis function partition of unity method” by Shile et al. (2024)

Nicolae Suciu
article en

Abstract

The goal of this article is to explain some striking discrepancies between the Monte Carlo inferences for flow in heterogeneous aquifers presented in (Shile et al., 2024) and reliable and verifiable results previously published. Comparisons with statistical inferences done within the same numerical setup and using the same benchmark codes demonstrate that quantifiable aspects, such as a too small departure from the linear theory and the decrease of the standard deviations with the increase of the aquifer heterogeneity, cannot be produced with the tools used by the authors. • Monte Carlo results of Shile et al. (2024) are compared to previously published ones. • Comparisons are also made with other methods for the same groundwater-flow benchmark. • Striking discrepancy with reliable and verifiable results indicate data fabrication.

Engineering Analysis with Boundary ElementsVol. 169
Romanian Academy (RO)
Clean water and sanitation
Openalex Percentile: Top 86%
Groundwater flow and contamination studies
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.