MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1995315604 · doi:10.2495/si120071

Global change implications on long-term water supply and demand forecasts in the Columbia River Basin

2012· article· en· W1995315604 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Michael E. Barber, J. C. Adam, Michael Brady, K. Chinnayakanahalli, Kirti Rajagopalan, S. Dinesh, Chad E. Kruger, C. Stockle, Georgine Yorgey

Bibliographic record

VenueWIT transactions on ecology and the environment · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWater resources management and optimization
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClimate changeThreatened speciesDrainage basinWater resourcesPopulationWater supplyWatershedPopulation growthAgricultureEndangered speciesNatural resource economicsEnvironmental scienceWater resource managementEnvironmental resource managementGeographyEcologyEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Columbia River Basin (CRB) encompasses parts of seven US states and British Columbia in Canada over a land mass approximately the size of France. It is a vital part of the ecosystem and economies of the entire region. The CRB, like many watersheds around the world, is experiencing increased pressure on water resources and ecosystems, due to population growth, threatened and endangered species, economic development, and climate change. Irrigation is responsible for the majority of consumptive use in the watershed so the implications of climate change are a tremendous concern as we strive to feed a growing population. To facilitate strategic planning and investment, the State of Washington requires a long-term water supply and demand forecast (the Forecast) every five years. An interdisciplinary WSU research team integrated three biophysical models with an agricultural economics model to conduct a system-wide assessment of how future environmental and economic conditions are likely to change water supply and demand by 2030. Timing of supply changes will shift water away from the Sustainable Irrigation and Drainage IV 77 www.witpress.com

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 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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.103
Threshold uncertainty score0.209

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.177
Teacher spread0.168 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations2
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWIT transactions on ecology and the environmentSame topicWater resources management and optimizationFrench-language works237,207