A modification to the Soil Conservation Service curve number method for steep slopes in the Loess Plateau of China
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The Soil Conservation Service curve number (CN) method is widely used for predicting direct runoff from rainfall. However, despite the extent of cultivation on hillslope areas, very few attempts have been made to incorporate a slope factor into the CN method. The objectives of this study were (1) to evaluate existing approaches integrating slope in the CN method, and (2) to develop an equation incorporating a slope factor into the CN method for application in the steep slope areas of the Loess Plateau of China. The dataset consisted of 11 years of rainfall and runoff measurements from two experimental sites with slopes ranging from 14 to 140%. The results indicated that the standard CN method underestimated large runoff events and overestimated small events. For our experimental conditions, the optimized and non‐optimized forms of the slope‐modified CN method of the Erosion Productivity Impact Calculator model improved runoff prediction for steep slopes, but large runoff events were still underestimated and small ones overpredicted. Based on relationships between slope and the observed and theoretical CN values, an equation was developed that better predicted runoff depths with an R 2 of 0·822 and a linear regression slope of 0·807. This slope‐adjusted CN equation appears to be the most appropriate for runoff prediction in the steep areas of the Loess Plateau of China. Copyright © 2005 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".