MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2011473471 · doi:10.4000/physio-geo.3752

Estimation et validation de la profondeur des nappes du bassin du N'zo, en Côte d'Ivoire, par le modèle WTR

2014· article· fr· W2011473471 on OpenAlexaff
Sékouba Oularé, Koffi Fernand Kouamé, Mahaman Bachir Saley, Gabriel Étienne Aké, Germain Miessan Adja, René Therrien

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysio-Géo · 2014
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicGroundwater and Watershed Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNappeGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Le présent travail a pour objectif d'étudier la profondeur des nappes du bassin versant du N'zo. La méthodologie adoptée est basée sur le modèle ou ratio de nappe WTR (Water Table Ratio). Ce modèle permet de distinguer les nappes contrôlées par la topographie (nappes superficielles) des nappes contrôlées par la recharge (nappes profondes). Les paramètres du modèle WTR sont employés sous forme de cartes thématiques, qui sont converties en raster, et les calculs sont effectués à l'échelle des pixels. Les résultats obtenus indiquent que les nappes du bassin versant sont peu profondes dans l'ensemble, car elles sont contrôlées par la topographie. Cependant quelques nappes un peu moins superficielles apparaissent de manière fragmentée, essentiellement dans la partie montagneuse localisée au nord de la zone d'étude. Ces résultats ont été validés en examinant les corrélations entre les ratios de nappe WTR calculés et les niveaux piézométriques mesurés. Les études de corrélation ont montré que le ratio de nappe WTR est inversement proportionnel à la profondeur de la nappe.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.071
Threshold uncertainty score0.141

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.211 · 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

Citations6
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysio-GéoSame topicGroundwater and Watershed AnalysisFrench-language works237,207