MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1975137199 · doi:10.12735/as.v1i2p43

Hargreaves Equation as an All-Season Simulator of Daily FAO-56 Penman-Monteith ETo

2013· article· en· W1975137199 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Eric Y. Kra

Bibliographic record

VenueAgricultural Science · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicPlant Water Relations and Carbon Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSimulationMeteorologyComputer scienceEnvironmental scienceGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This work showed the Hargreaves equation (HG) can be modified into a highly efficient computational replacement for the FAO-56 Penman-Monteith equation and its auxiliary functions for the computation of daily reference evapotranspiration (ETo) estimation when only available data are daily temperature data. By modifying all the constants (i.e., '0.0023', '0.5' and '17.8') in HG and adding a new constant, a modified HG (HG1234) gave almost identical estimates of daily ETo as FPM, with modified coefficient of efficiency, 𝐸1 = 0.99, 𝑟2 = 1.00, and MAE of 0.00 mm/d for a weather station in Accra, Ghana. HG1234 and ten other less drastic modifications of HG were compared against FPM at simulated average wind speeds, 𝑢2, of 0.5 m/s, 2.0 m/s and 4.0 m/s for daily estimates of ETo. In general the uncalibrated HG predicted FPM with very low 𝐸1 at 𝑢2 other than the global average of 2 m/s, and the more drastic the modification of HG the higher its efficiency at simulating FPM ETo at all wind velocities. Thus although HG was not originally developed for daily ETo estimation, modifying it to HG1234 can turn it into a very efficient and much faster simulator of FPM daily ETo estimation that would be very useful in applications, such as areal ETo estimation research using satellite images, where fast and frequent re-evaluations of FPM ETo for millions of points are necessary.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.063
Threshold uncertainty score0.125

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.208 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations3
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAgricultural ScienceSame topicPlant Water Relations and Carbon DynamicsFrench-language works237,207