MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2046498361 · doi:10.4296/cwrj3203179

A Review of Statistical Water Temperature Models

2007· review· en· W2046498361 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Loubna Benyahya, Daniel Caissie, André St‐Hilaire, Taha B. M. J. Ouarda, Bernard Bobée

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Water Resources Journal / Revue canadienne des ressources hydriques · 2007
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrological Forecasting Using AI
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStatistical modelParametric statisticsParametric modelComputer scienceEconometricsEnvironmental scienceStatisticsMathematicsMachine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The use of statistical models to simulate or to predict stream water temperature is becoming an increasingly important tool in water resources and aquatic habitat management. This article provides an overview of the existing statistical water temperature models. Different models have been developed and used to analyze water temperature-environmental variables relationship. These are grouped into two major categories: deterministic and statistical/stochastic models. Generally, deterministic models require numerous input data (e.g., depth, amount of shading, wind velocity). Hence, they are more appropriate for analyzing different impact scenarios due to anthropogenic effects (e.g., presence of reservoirs, thermal pollution and deforestation). In contrast to the deterministic models, the main advantage of the statistical models is their relative simplicity and relative minimal data requirement. Parametric models such as linear and non-linear regression are popular methods often used for shorter time scales (e.g., daily, weekly). Ridge regression presents an advantage when the independent variables are highly correlated. The periodic models present advantages in dealing with seasonality that often exists in periodic time series. Non-parametric models (e.g., k-nearest neighbours, artificial neural networks) are better suited for analysis of nonlinear relationships between water temperature and environmental variables. Finally, advantages and disadvantages of existing models and studies are discussed.

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)0.003
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.006
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.004

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.226 · 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
GenreReview

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

Citations299
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Water Resources Journal / Revue canadienne des ressources hydriquesSame topicHydrological Forecasting Using AIFrench-language works237,207