Improved Recharge Estimation from Portable, Low‐Cost Weather Stations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Groundwater recharge estimation is a critical quantity for sustainable groundwater management. The feasibility and robustness of recharge estimation was evaluated using physical-based modeling procedures, and data from a low-cost weather station with remote sensor techniques in Southern Abbotsford, British Columbia, Canada. Recharge was determined using the Richards-based vadose zone hydrological model, HYDRUS-1D. The required meteorological data were recorded with a HOBO(TM) weather station for a short observation period (about 1 year) and an existing weather station (Abbotsford A) for long-term study purpose (27 years). Undisturbed soil cores were taken at two locations in the vicinity of the HOBO(TM) weather station. The derived soil hydraulic parameters were used to characterize the soil in the numerical model. Model performance was evaluated using observed soil moisture and soil temperature data obtained from subsurface remote sensors. A rigorous sensitivity analysis was used to test the robustness of the model. Recharge during the short observation period was estimated at 863 and 816 mm. The mean annual recharge was estimated at 848 and 859 mm/year based on a time series of 27 years. The relative ratio of annual recharge-precipitation varied from 43% to 69%. From a monthly recharge perspective, the majority (80%) of recharge due to precipitation occurred during the hydrologic winter period. The comparison of the recharge estimates with other studies indicates a good agreement. Furthermore, this method is able to predict transient recharge estimates, and can provide a reasonable tool for estimates on nutrient leaching that is often controlled by strong precipitation events and rapid infiltration of water and nitrate into the soil.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".