MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1941098055 · doi:10.1002/2015wr017780

Physically based modeling in catchment hydrology at 50: Survey and outlook

2015· article· en· W1941098055 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueWater Resources Research · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrology and Watershed Management Studies
Canadian institutionsInstitut National de la Recherche Scientifique
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPopulationScale (ratio)Hydrological modellingComputer scienceProcess (computing)AdvectionField (mathematics)Consistency (knowledge bases)Hydrology (agriculture)Environmental scienceGeographyMathematicsGeologyClimatologyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Integrated, process-based numerical models in hydrology are rapidly evolving, spurred by novel theories in mathematical physics, advances in computational methods, insights from laboratory and field experiments, and the need to better understand and predict the potential impacts of population, land use, and climate change on our water resources. At the catchment scale, these simulation models are commonly based on conservation principles for surface and subsurface water flow and solute transport (e.g., the Richards, shallow water, and advection-dispersion equations), and they require robust numerical techniques for their resolution. Traditional (and still open) challenges in developing reliable and efficient models are associated with heterogeneity and variability in parameters and state variables; nonlinearities and scale effects in process dynamics; and complex or poorly known boundary conditions and initial system states. As catchment modeling enters a highly interdisciplinary era, new challenges arise from the need to maintain physical and numerical consistency in the description of multiple processes that interact over a range of scales and across different compartments of an overall system. This paper first gives an historical overview (past 50 years) of some of the key developments in physically based hydrological modeling, emphasizing how the interplay between theory, experiments, and modeling has contributed to advancing the state of the art. The second part of the paper examines some outstanding problems in integrated catchment modeling from the perspective of recent developments in mathematical and computational science.

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.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.723
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
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 science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.101
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.216 · 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