MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2019916745 · doi:10.1139/f04-202

Empirical model for predicting a catchment-scale metric of surface water transit time in streams

2005· article· en· W2019916745 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Erwin E. Van Nieuwenhuyse

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrology and Watershed Management Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSTREAMSDrainage basinHydrology (agriculture)Environmental scienceMathematicsGeologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Estimates of average water velocity (vw) extracted from tracer dye studies (vdye) or calculated from velocity–discharge relationships at continuous-flow gauges (vgage) were combined with catchment area (A) and other readily available data for 111 streams throughout the conterminous United States. The resulting data set (n = 305) represented broad ranges of A (65 – 62 419 km2), mainstem length (Lmax, 15.6–867 km), slope (S, 0.14–11.5 m·km–1), and daily average discharge (Q, 0.09–634 m3·s–1). A catchment-scale metric of surface water transit time (Tw, Lmaxvdye–1) ranged from 0.3 to 40 days, averaging 7.2 days. A bivariate regression model using log10 A and log10 Q explained 83% of the variation in log10 Tw and predicted Tw with an average precision of ±49%. By contrast, a previously published model based on hydraulic geometry relationships overestimated Tw by 100%. Application of my model to five streams nested in a ninth-order (ω = 9) catchment indicated that under dry (September) and wet (March), long-term (1954–2001) median flow conditions, vw increased with Q (vw ∝ Q0.3) as far downstream as ω = 8 and then remained constant or declined. The slope of this longitudinal vw–Q relationship was three times greater than the expected value. Longitudinal velocity gradients in many streams may thus be much steeper than commonly assumed.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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 score0.983
Threshold uncertainty score0.033

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.212 · 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
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences→Same topicHydrology and Watershed Management Studies→French-language works237,207→