MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1899036001 · doi:10.1139/l11-112

Hydrologic modelling to assess the climate change impacts in a Southern Ontario watershed

2012· article· en· W1899036001 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Masihur Rahman, Tirupati Bolisetti, Ram Balachandar

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Civil Engineering · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrology and Watershed Management Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
FundersEnvironmental Restoration and Conservation Agency
KeywordsWatershedClimate changeEnvironmental scienceHydrology (agriculture)DownscalingHydrological modellingLow-impact developmentWater resource managementClimatologySurface runoffStormwater managementGeologyStormwaterComputer scienceGeotechnical engineeringEcologyOceanography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In Southern Ontario, the Canard River watershed is the largest subwatershed of the Detroit River watershed on the Canadian side. The Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT) model was implemented in the Canard River Watershed to understand the hydrologic regime and assess the impacts of potential future climate change on the hydrology of the watershed. The SWAT model was calibrated and validated against observed streamflow data. The Nash-Suttcliffe efficiencies of the model for monthly streamflow predictions were 0.81 and 0.83, respectively, during the calibration and validation periods. The LARS-WG, weather generator was employed to generate daily future weather data at local scale using the Canadian Regional Climate Model (CRCM) outputs under SRES A2 scenario for the years 2041 to 2070. It was found from the model results that the average annual streamflow could be increased by 12% compared to that over the base period from 1961 to 1990. The results also indicated that streamflow would be increased signifi...

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.778
Threshold uncertainty score0.953

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 studies0.0000.000
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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.201
Teacher spread0.168 · 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

Citations37
Published2012
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Civil EngineeringSame topicHydrology and Watershed Management StudiesFrench-language works237,207