MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2061176003 · doi:10.1623/hysj.52.3.538

Simulation of the hydrological processes on reconstructed watersheds using system dynamics

2007· article· en· W2061176003 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Amin Elshorbagy, Antarpreet Jutla, James A. Kells

Bibliographic record

VenueHydrological Sciences Journal · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrology and Watershed Management Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaSyncrude
KeywordsWatershedEnvironmental scienceHydrology (agriculture)Surface runoffEvapotranspirationLand reclamationComputer scienceGeologyGeographyGeotechnical engineeringMachine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Reconstruction of disturbed watersheds is a common practice by the oil sands industry in northern Alberta, Canada. The reconstruction and restoration of the watershed hydrology are required as part of the reclamation mandated by Alberta Environment for mine closure. Assessment of the hydrological performance of the reconstructed watersheds is essential to ensure a sustainable reclamation strategy. A conceptual lumped system dynamics watershed (SDW) model is developed and calibrated in this study. The model, built within an object-based simulation environment, is capable of simulating the various hydrological processes in the reconstructed watersheds with good accuracy. STELLA Software is used as an object-based simulation environment that allows visual computations. The SDW model developed combines both physically-based and empirical formulations to replicate the hydrological system mathematically. The system dynamics approach along with the visual simulation environment help in developing a simulation-for-learning model, not only simulation for prediction. The model is successfully calibrated and validated; the results show that the SDW model is capable of simulating the various hydrological processes (soil moisture, evapotranspiration and runoff) with good accuracy. The SDW model can help in the assessment of the short- and long-term performances of the reconstructed watersheds, thus providing a useful decision-aid tool for the mining industry.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.060
Threshold uncertainty score0.118

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.235 · 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

Citations48
Published2007
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHydrological Sciences JournalSame topicHydrology and Watershed Management StudiesFrench-language works237,207