MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Recharge Estimation for Transient Ground Water Modeling

2002· article· en· W2012589629 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueGround Water · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrology and Watershed Management Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGroundwater rechargeMODFLOWEnvironmental scienceGroundwaterHydrology (agriculture)Water tablePrecipitationGroundwater modelLand coverGeologyMeteorologyGeotechnical engineeringAquiferLand useEngineeringGeographyCivil engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Reliable ground water models require both an accurate physical representation of the system and appropriate boundary conditions. While physical attributes are generally considered static, boundary conditions, such as ground water recharge rates, can be highly variable in both space and time. A practical methodology incorporating the hydrologic model HELP3 in conjunction with a geographic information system was developed to generate a physically based and highly detailed recharge boundary condition for ground water modeling. The approach uses daily precipitation and temperature records in addition to land use/land cover and soils data. The importance of the method in transient ground water modeling is demonstrated by applying it to a MODFLOW modeling study in New Jersey. In addition to improved model calibration, the results from the study clearly indicate the importance of using a physically based and highly detailed recharge boundary condition in ground water quality modeling, where the detailed knowledge of the evolution of the ground water flowpaths is imperative. The simulated water table is within 0.5 m of the observed values using the method, while the water levels can differ by as much as 2 m using uniform recharge conditions. The results also show that the combination of temperature and precipitation plays an important role in the amount and timing of recharge in cooler climates. A sensitivity analysis further reveals that increasing the leaf area index, the evaporative zone depth, or the curve number in the model will result in decreased recharge rates over time, with the curve number having the greatest impact.

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.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
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 score0.216
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

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)0.0020.002

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.190 · 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