MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1955691646 · doi:10.1016/j.jhydrol.2015.10.070

Assessing the capability of the SWAT model to simulate snow, snow melt and streamflow dynamics over an alpine watershed

2015· article· en· W1955691646 on OpenAlex
Youen Grusson, Xiaoling Sun, Simon Gascoin, Sabine Sauvage, François Anctil

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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Hydrology · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrology and Watershed Management Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsSnowWatershedEnvironmental scienceStreamflowHydrology (agriculture)SWAT modelSnowmeltSoil and Water Assessment ToolHydrological modellingSnow fieldCalibrationElevation (ballistics)Scale (ratio)Water cycleGeologyClimatologySnow coverDrainage basinComputer scienceGeomorphologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Snow is an important hydrological reservoir within the water cycle, particularly when the watershed includes a mountainous area. Modellers often overlook water stocked in snow pack and its influence on water distribution, especially when only some portions of the watershed is snow dominated. Snow is usually considered to improve hydrological modelling statistics, but without any regard for the realism of its representation or its influence on the hydrological cycle. This is all the more true when semi-distributed models are used, often considered inadequate for spatially representing such phenomena. On the other hand, semi-distributed models are being increasingly used to realise water budget assessment at a regional scale and such studies should not be realised without a good representation of the snow pack. Lack of field measurements is also a frequent justification for avoiding validating simulated snow packs. In this study, remote sensing data provided by MODIS is combined with in situ data, enabling the validation of the snow pack simulated by the Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT), a semi-distributed, physically-based model, implemented over a partly snow-dominated watershed. Snow simulation was performed without complex algorithms or calibration procedures, using the elevation bands option included in the model and related snow parameters. Representation of snow cover and hydrological simulation were achieved by a standard automatic calibration of the model, over the 2000–2010 period, performed by SWAT-Cup/SUFI2, using six hydrological gauging stations along the fluvial continuum downstream of the snow-dominated area. Results highlight three important points: (i) Set-up of elevation bands over mountainous headwater improved hydrological simulation performance, even well downstream of the snow-dominated area. (ii) SWAT produced a good spatial and temporal representation of the snow cover, using MODIS data, despite a slight overestimation at the end of the snow season on the highest elevation bands. A comparison of the model estimate of snowpack water content with in situ data revealed an underestimation in water content in the lower part of the watershed and a slight overestimation in its upper part. Those errors are linked and originate from difficulties of the model to incorporate very local spatial and temporal variations of the precipitation lapse rate. (iii) Elevation bands brought consistent changes in water distribution within the hydrological cycle of implemented watersheds, which are more in line with expected flow paths.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.065
Threshold uncertainty score0.274

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.261 · 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