MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2027002773 · doi:10.13031/2013.34904

Effect of Climate Change on Low-Flow Conditions in the Ruscom River Watershed, Ontario

2010· article· en· W2027002773 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
MM Rahman, Tirupati Bolisetti, Ram Balachandar

Bibliographic record

VenueTransactions of the ASABE · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrology and Watershed Management Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStreamflowEnvironmental scienceWatershedSoil and Water Assessment ToolPrecipitationClimate changeHydrology (agriculture)SWAT modelClimatologyDrainage basinGeographyMeteorologyGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The objective of the present study is to explore and project the effect of climate change on the low flows from the Ruscom River watershed in Ontario, Canada. The watershed is one of the subwatersheds draining into Lake St. Clair on the Canadian side of the Great Lakes system. The Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT) model was implemented to simulate the hydrologic regime in the watershed. SWAT was calibrated and validated for the streamflow from the Ruscom River watershed using the observed monthly flow data. The LARS-WG weather generator was used for the generation of daily future weather data at local scale using the Canadian Regional Climate Model (CRCM) outputs under the SRES A2 scenario for the period 2041-2070. The Nash-Sutcliffe efficiency (NSE) and coefficient of determination (r2) for streamflow predictions using SWAT were found to be greater than 0.74. Under the projected climate scenario, the future mean monthly minimum and maximum temperatures by the year 2070 may be increased by 3.2C and 3.6C, respectively, compared to the temperatures in the base period (1961-1990). The average annual precipitation would also increase by 8%. SWAT-simulated flow duration curves indicated that low flows in the Ruscom River would be increased in spring but decreased in summer and fall due to the possible climate change conditions. Based on the frequency analysis, the annual minimum monthly flow of five-year return period could be reduced by as much as 50%.

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.159

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.215 · 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 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

Citations23
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransactions of the ASABESame topicHydrology and Watershed Management StudiesFrench-language works237,207