MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1500874545 · doi:10.2166/wst.2002.0227

Modeling diffuse pollution with a distributed approach

2002· article· en· W1500874545 on OpenAlexaff
Luis Fernando León‐Fernandez, E. D. Soulis, N. Kouwen, Grahame J. Farquhar

Bibliographic record

VenueWater Science & Technology · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrology and Watershed Management Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSurface runoffEnvironmental scienceWatershedWater qualityHydrology (agriculture)Distributed element modelNonpoint source pollutionPollutionFlood mythPoint source pollutionGeographic information systemComputer scienceRemote sensingEngineeringGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The transferability of parameters for non-point source pollution models to other watersheds, especially those in remote areas without enough data for calibration, is a major problem in diffuse pollution modeling. A water quality component was developed for WATFLOOD (a flood forecast hydrological model) to deal with sediment and nutrient transport. The model uses a distributed group response unit approach for water quantity and quality modeling. Runoff, sediment yield and soluble nutrient concentrations are calculated separately for each land cover class, weighted by area and then routed downstream. The distributed approach for the water quality model for diffuse pollution in agricultural watersheds is described in this paper. Integrating the model with data extracted using GIS technology (Geographical Information Systems) for a local watershed, the model is calibrated for the hydrologic response and validated for the water quality component. With the connection to GIS and the group response unit approach used in this paper, model portability increases substantially, which will improve non-point source modeling at the watershed scale level.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.187
Teacher spread0.175 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations16
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWater Science & TechnologySame topicHydrology and Watershed Management StudiesFrench-language works237,207