MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1607618299 · doi:10.1029/2005wr004227

Derivation of unit hydrograph using a transfer function approach

2006· article· en· W1607618299 on OpenAlexaff
Zuoliang Yang, Dawei Han

Bibliographic record

VenueWater Resources Research · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrology and Watershed Management Studies
Canadian institutionsMinistry of the Environment, Conservation and Parks
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHydrographTransfer functionSmoothingNonlinear systemApplied mathematicsFunction (biology)MathematicsDegree (music)Computer scienceStatisticsPhysicsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The unit hydrograph (UH) concept and model have been widely used in the hydrological field over the past decades. However, the estimation of such a model in practice has always been a challenge for researchers and practitioners because such a model is usually ill formed in mathematical terms. The large number of parameters (or the number of ordinates) in a unit hydrograph model are correlated to a certain degree, and this could cause unstable results. So far, the research has been mainly focused on restricting the negative values and smoothing the oscillation by brute force methods, such as linear programming, and has achieved a certain degree of success. However, the number of parameters involved and the lack of stable model response are still a problem. In this study, a new model structure has been proposed that would inherently remove the negative UH ordinates and guarantee a smooth curve. This model is derived by the unit pulse response of a given discrete transfer function in the time domain by restricting its poles along the positive real axis in its Z domain (that is, there are no imaginary components and no negative real values). The model is termed the physically realizable transfer function. The strengths of its structure are that it is numerically stable, physically realizable, parsimonious in parameters, and easy to implement in real time for its state and parameter updating. Its shortcomings are that it has nonlinear pole positions and a more complicated parameter estimation process. A case study with two events in England has been used to demonstrate the application of such a model.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.303
Threshold uncertainty score0.355

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.225 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations36
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWater Resources ResearchSame topicHydrology and Watershed Management StudiesFrench-language works237,207