Inverse Modeling - Science topic

Adding a metal oxide coating to a metal slab can be achieved through various methods. Here are a few common techniques:

1. **Thermal Oxidation:**

- Subject the metal slab to high temperatures in the presence of oxygen.

- Common for metals like aluminum and titanium.

- Forms a natural oxide layer on the metal surface.

2. **Anodization:**

- Applicable to metals like aluminum.

- Electro-chemically oxidize the metal by immersing it in an electrolyte solution and applying a controlled electric current.

- Produces a controlled, thicker oxide layer with enhanced properties.

3. **Chemical Vapor Deposition (CVD):**

- Introduce a gaseous metal precursor and an oxidizing agent at elevated temperatures.

- Reactants deposit a thin oxide layer on the metal surface.

- Requires specialized equipment.

4. **Electrochemical Deposition:**

- Submerge the metal slab in an electrolyte solution containing metal ions.

- Apply an electric current to induce the reduction of metal ions, forming a metal oxide coating on the slab.

5. **Sol-Gel Method:**

- Prepare a sol (solution) containing metal alkoxide precursors.

- Apply the sol to the metal surface and allow it to undergo gelation and subsequent drying.

- Heat treatment then forms the metal oxide film.

6. **Spray Pyrolysis:**

- Dissolve metal salts in a solvent to create a precursor solution.

- Spray the solution onto the metal slab, and heat it to decompose the precursor, leaving a metal oxide coating.

Choose the method based on the specific metal, desired thickness, and properties of the oxide layer. Each technique has its advantages and limitations, so the selection depends on the application and desired outcome.

The problem is also discussed in the recent literature, please consult the following thesis

An inverse problem is a mathematical procedure that starts from a set of observations and calculates the causal factors that produced them by minimizing an objective function (e.g. the difference between the measured/observed data and the modelled ones). A forward problem (or direct problem) is the use of a model in order to simulate an outcome. The causal factors are a set of user-defined parameters. The modeller have to change them by a trial-and-error approach in order to minimize the difference between the observed and the modelled data. The inversion automatically does what the modeller would do manually (calibration). In fact, in the inversion process a large number of direct models are solved as long as the objective function is minimized. Usually, it takes a number of iterations.

Can you share the experimental transmissibility response in .csv format? Thanks in advance.

I suggest you follow : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bm1yqdM_yWc

Richard Gloaguen, thank you for your answer. As you said we can get the LOS displacement but to estimate the displacement velocity, the linear model is used (in PSI and SBAS method). How do you think about this? For one of my study area, the deformation rate was 30 mm/year in 2003-2010, and 150 mm/year in 2017-2018. Since the linear inversion was used for this two time period, can we guess that approximately 50 cm land uplift was occurred during 2003-2018?

Dear Mohamed-Mourad Lafifi , thank you for the reply.

I'm exploring the articles you provided, and that is the direction I wanted to get.

Hello,

If you want to include a new solid phase not included in your database you should include in your PHREEQC input:

PHASES

CaF2(s)

CaF2 = Ca +2 + 2F-

log_k -5 # -5 is just an example, you should include the value you want to use for this reaction.

Hope this helps you

Vanessa

I am doing Research in machine learning with renewable energy. After getting experimental data, we can do hybrid neural network modelling. Can U include one of the member in your project brother

(continuing...)

Japan is a small island, a size smaller than the state of California. We have roughly 1/3 population to U.S. citezens in a land smaller than a single state, which is very crowded. This is an important point, but so is the fact that it is an island, isolated 360 deg. by ocean. In the years of 600 AD to 1000 AD, the cruise to China or Korea was perilous. It was up to god, whether if he finds a purpose he'll keep you safe in his hands. If not, god bless the crews. Historians don't know the exact number that made it across the sea, but by then there were a lot of attempts by merchants from both of the countries on crossing the sea for trade. No one really knows the numbers but we know that there were more than a few that went ship reck. The pass got more firm in the 1200 ADs when the Mongolians came for take over of Japan. They tried 2 times with in like 50 years of interval, but lucky Japan, a tyhoon hit the shore the Mogolians were trying the D-day "Normandy action," making their on-shore to the island. Some historic remains indicates Mongolians came with a number of 20,000 ships. But twice, the deadly tyhoon wind tiped more than 3/4 of their battle ships, making them flee back to the continent. This is the incident when the internationally famous "KAMI-KAZE" word was born where "KAMI"=god and "KAZE"=wind. after this foriegn invasion in the 1200s, Japan didn't experience any invasion attempts till the mid 1800s. So vastly 600 of years in an isolated island, the whole population was nearly a very closed community. Within the 600 years, Japan had countless numbers of civil wars on who is going to rule the whole island. But this is a thought only for a very small portion of the population which had wealth enough not just to make their own living but to have their own army. Back in those days, this ment that these reigional bosses owned land and farmers, because rice was the only mass producted cabo-hydrates, crops that people can feed on. Fishes were a great important nutrition, but it could only be eaten in the sea shores, you couldn't carry them to the inner lands because feshes rott very quickly. So, these riches needed land to collect enough famers to grow crops(=rice) to feed the farmers themselves, the samurai army and the bosses' family. Also, the land they had in control was of great essense because you can't have enough variety of nutrition just by rice and some vegitables, you needed a land with a sea shore or, an allience with a land lord for trading something with fishes, marinated for presearvative food to convey to the inner lands. Remember, over 70% of Japan is mountains. For mass population, we had less than 25% area to make a living. So it was severe where your land is for the land lord, and critical for the samurai knights and farmers to choose which lords they want ask for protection from invasions by other land people. Also, one must be aware, at least back then, that it was a lot easier to catch fish than to hunt a fox in the woods. Our land is covers by woods by its' 70% so we probably had a lot of fox and deers and those four footed mammals. But fish was everywhere, given that you had a sea shore or some kind of access to such community.

  This is the kind of picture you should have about our history, though there is a lot more in detail to it but should do enough to understand our culture, especially how we see other people. As you can see, we did fight and did some small wars here and there, but that is only a reality of like the10 to maybe 20 % of the population. It means that you needed that much portion of people to be famers to feed them all. Farmers were a specialty skill, so special like sword art my samurais, because our wheather was highly four seasoned, it took a great deal of experience to be an indivisual farmer. So did samurais. It was a miracle case that such skill was embodied in a single man. People write and know about the land lord level of peoples' histories. But our culture as a tribe has a great deal to owe to the rest of the 80% of the population which was the farmers and merchants.

   Without skills of combats, with the chances of living through with your land or your lifesavings is just about 0% in a war, all they could do was to flee. Flee to a diferent riegion, a land, not necessarily a good land lord, but a one that is safe to live in. Because safety comes first. Farmers cannot run around with their land in their bags, nor does the land grow their fruits a day after they seed the land. You need like a half an year of taking care of, maintaining the field to get the food. So it naturally leeds to an urge of farmers and merchants, non-samurai, land lords, to come up with a way to work together to provide themselves more safety and more stability in their daily life. This is why Japanese are so unversatile, so in union, so colourless, single minded. This is of course based on school classes and the readings after grown to find out what really happend in other sophisticated books. We needed unity to preserve a stable, safe, productive neighborhood. Witch hunts and religeous challenges that happended in the mid centuries in Europe didn't happen so much in Japan, becase we had 70% mountain woods where you can find cure plants, and probably over 90% were a light buddist. It wasn't worth it to challenge out side the community, because to gain land on your own, that meant to do it starting from clearing up the woods because all the plane lands are already taken. Who would follow you to cry out Coran, the Bible, when just lightly beleiving that their is a Budda that looks down on you not to do bad things. Besides, you can get a worth of life with in the community if you follow the domestic rules. Japan, in the mideval eges, was not a starving island. It was probably rather wealthy. That is why they tought their children what they valued, and children followed it because they'ed be thrown out of the village if they didn't, ending up starving.

Now, emagine this going on for 600 years. Do you think the people in the 1800s still knew why they were following their parents, why they never should challenge their samurai lords, why they should cherish getting along with th society? I beleave NO. We are not talking about the post WWII, we are not talking about a society where everyone has access to community libraries. Not just libraries, how much do you think had access to books? We didn't have the printing technology, because of the ways we write a cursive style of KANJIs. As a result, this era developed the fundamentals of the Japanese unity characteristics. We had a major revolution in politics followed by a westernisation. But not so many foriengners know that these changes were purelly all orchestrated by the "mis-fits," "the trouble makers," "the revels," like the "Think different" ad by Steve Jobs on his come-back to apple. People who had differents thoughts, who weren't affraid of having disparities from the community, and payed no respects to the status-quo. They changed the country's vector to the western world, and their decendants pushed it forward. But they were still the mis-fits. 90% was still a follower. do what the person to your right does. Stay close with your neighbors. Work hard to get an easier life to live. The spirit that was concretely made in the former 600 years was still firmly there. That's why Japanese did the "KAMI-KAZE" suicide attacks. No one wanted to die. No one believed in their making a successful suicide would save Japan, nor make their family life any better. Maybe the very first "KAMI-KAZE" squad believed in so, but not the following. They saw them doing their KAMI-KAZE, and it did nothing to the course of the ware. They sae that it was all just for dumping their life in vain. But, they still did it. Why? Recall the 600 years worth of recursing the same ethical routine. Look how we came back from the great loss of the WWII. Tokyo was a totally flattened land. The bomb got all the buildings except for the Emperial Pallace. How did we regain our vitality and became the world second largest GDP country, despite we're only the size of California? That's right. We were the economic animals. We were preyers, searching for preys. Emagine a 90 million people with the mind set of the former 600 years, who does the same and work the same as the person on his right. Also, emagine that there's a huge market that can buy the products made by us. Plus, the most important of all, the more they worked, the more they sold, the more revenues they gained. Who would stop pushing harder as long as working harder will get them wealthier? This is the one new thing that this tribe learned, which does not work after reaching the fronteir of the world. This only worked when you didn't have to be creative. Just following the guy before you works, and makes them more prosperous. This is "the -Japanese-mindset" of today. For around a 1000 years, probably more than 95% didn't need to be creative. No one did things differently. No one challenged the status-quo. No one had to. Then why did our culture evolve from time to time? Like the UTAMARO, HOKUSAI arts...the westernisation...recall, this was all because of the mis-fits. Not the 95% population.

SO, your in the 21st century, working for a company. Don't read books outside of their work. No books within their interest because it's more fun playing golf rather than reading about it. Besides, none of your predecesors make better scores than his boss. Getting better at the sport is rather a risk. As you can see, our ethics is not based on stepping forward. Out ethics is to stay calm and still, harmonized with the sourounding. Even if your in Poland for buying a company, we are apt to still think that the Polish is the wierd thinkers, not themselves regardless to the point that where they stand is POLAND, not JAPAN.

You see the pattern with us? We're not against or opposed to change. We feel discomfort in changing what we used to, and we feel a lot comfortable staying with how it was before and feel safer by doing it. We are scared to be responsible for something, because 90% of the population that ever had their foot on Japanese soil were never asked to do so. They didn't have to be a leader a risk taker to live a safe life. In the 1970s to 1980s, we didn't have to adventure. Working harder worked worked for us, and the CEOs only had to say "yes" because our product by hard work naturally were bought. No risk to think. That means no art of risk taking is passed on to their decendants. No adaptations necessary for growth. No such art for adaptation are passed on. So, it's very natural nor the deal in Poland to go south when a stereotype  Japanese is taking charge. Infact I wonder if he really has his ethics and philosophy of what taking in charge is. The ones who succeed are the ones who question the status-quo and look for other thoughts in books and speaches all around the world. Who can see Japan as if he's seeing it from the International Space Station, theres Japan, there's Hawaii, theirs Alaska,.... Japan being just one on them. As long as the Japanese sees the world from inside Japan, he's mindset is still in the early 1800s. No way he could close a deal in Poland.

We are not creative. 90% of us follow what the rest is doing. Only less than 5% are creative, does something that has never been done before, done in different countries, question the status-quo and take action about it. Are these creaters all in the position of a businness CEO? No. That means, there are CEOs who are out-of-time midsetted. They don't do much. I hope this long input gives you a different angle of how you look at Japan. To understand Japan businness, you have to understand the culture and history. To understand Japans creativity, you have to understand the culture and history.

you can use IPI2Win software instead of using RES1d software. it is easy to use for fed your data and for inversion method

I'm not quite sure about your question, but Passino book is mostly on design of fuzzy controllers. If you are interested in Neuro-fuzzy or adaptive fuzzy controllers, Jang is the best reference. 

It depends on the target and its depth. the GPR method is good but it requires corrections for the "cultural noise. I am proposing a new method. You can use an electromagnetic device called PL2000 (made in Japen). I've successfully used it ( with Minimum error). that is very better of GPR but only use iron target for example Gas iron pipe , power lines, Conductive cables and ......

As stated in the earlier comments, to maintain the stability property the step-size of the adaptive algorithm (equalizer here) should be lower than 2/lambda_max, where lambda_max is the maximum eigenvalue of the covariance matrix R=E[uu^H], where u is the tap input vector. This upper bound is only a first approximation and it shoud be in reality lower by a factor of 1/10 in order to ensure stability whatever the experimental conditions are.

In your experiment, the properties of this covariance matrix R may change when varying the parameters of the Rayleigh multipath channel and in some configuration the fixed step-size is greater than the maximum allowed value. That is the reason why "...in some coefficients of Rayleigh multipath the training is bad".

To ensure stability, several algorithms are usually proposed :

1- use of of Normalized algorithm (i.e. NLMS) instead of the standard LMS. Then you will be independent of the energy variations in the tap input vector u.

2- use of standard approaches for computing the variable step-size such as (main relevant papers):

Regards

It is often due to a mismatch of complexity of model and information in data (observability) or due to structural identifiability issues in the model. Consider: using a simpler model, using additional complementary data, or reparametrizing the model structure.

I would suggest looking at:

Grayson, Rodger B, Günter Blöschl, Andrew W Western, and Thomas A McMahon. 2002. “Advances in the Use of Observed Spatial Patterns of Catchment Hydrological Response.” Advances in Water Resources 25 (8-12): 1313–34. doi:10.1016/S0309-1708(02)00060-X.

Gupta, Vijai Kumar, and Soroosh Sorooshian. 1983. “Uniqueness and Observability of Conceptual Rainfall-Runoff Model Parameters: The Percolation Process Examined.” Water Resources Research 19 (1): 269–76. doi:10.1029/WR019i001p00269.

Sorooshian, Soroosh, and Vijai Kumar Gupta. 1985. “The Analysis of Structural Identifiability: Theory and Application to Conceptual Rainfall-Runoff Models.” Water Resources Research 21 (4): 487–95. doi:10.1029/WR021i004p00487.

Gupta, Hoshin V., Martyn P. Clark, Jasper A. Vrugt, Gab Abramowitz, and Ming Ye. 2012. “Towards a Comprehensive Assessment of Model Structural Adequacy.” Water Resources Research 48 (8): n/a–n/a. doi:10.1029/2011WR011044.

Marsili-Libelli S, Beck MB, Brunner P, Croke BFW, Guillaume JHA, Jakeman AJ, Jakeman JD,Keesman K, Stigter H (2014). Practical identifiability analysis of environmental models. In: Ames, D.P., Quinn, N.W.T., Rizzoli, A.E. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 7th International Congress on Environmental Modelling and Software, June 15-19, San Diego, California, USA. ISBN: 978-88-9035-744-2, available at: http://www.iemss.org/sites/iemss2014/papers/iemss2014_submission_315.pdf

Dear Gilles Arnold

thank you very much for your informative answer

Regards

thank you Sir for your valuable suggestion.