MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1967622273 · doi:10.4236/jwarp.2015.71002

Spatial-Temporal Dynamics of Runoff Generation Areas in a Small Agricultural Watershed in Southern Ontario

2015· article· en· W1967622273 on OpenAlexaffabout
Kamran Chapi, Ramesh Rudra, S. I. Ahmed, Alamgir Akhtar Khan, Bahram Gharabaghi, W. T. Dickinson, Pradeep Goel

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Water Resource and Protection · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrology and Watershed Management Studies
Canadian institutionsMinistry of the Environment, Conservation and ParksUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSurface runoffWatershedHydrology (agriculture)Environmental scienceInfiltration (HVAC)Runoff curve numberWeirWatershed areaStreamflowSpatial variabilityEcologyGeographyMeteorologyDrainage basinGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The identification of runoff generating areas (RGAs) within a watershed is a difficult task because of their temporal and spatial behavior. A watershed was selected to investigate the RGAs to determine the factors affecting spatio-temporally in southern Ontario. The watershed was divided into 8 fields having a Wireless System Network (WSN) and a V-notch weir for flow and soil moisture measurements. The results show that surface runoff is generated by the infiltration excess mechanism in summer and fall, and the saturation excess mechanism in spring. The statistical analysis suggested that the amount of rainfall and rainfall intensity for summer (R2 = 0.63, 0.82) and fall (R2 = 0.74, 0.80), respectively, affected the RGAs. The analysis showed that 15% area generated 85% of surface runoff in summer, 100% of runoff in fall, and 40% of runoff in spring. The methodology developed has potential for identifying RGAs for protecting Ontario’s water resources.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.077
Threshold uncertainty score0.156

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.190
Teacher spread0.169 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations25
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Water Resource and ProtectionSame topicHydrology and Watershed Management StudiesFrench-language works237,207