MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2063453643 · doi:10.1073/pnas.1317606111

Toward global mapping of river discharge using satellite images and at-many-stations hydraulic geometry

2014· article· en· W2063453643 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Colin J. Gleason, L. C. Smith

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFlood Risk Assessment and Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
KeywordsHydraulicsSatelliteRemote sensingWater resourcesHydrology (agriculture)Flow (mathematics)Environmental scienceDischargeLimit (mathematics)Computer scienceGeologyGeographyGeometryEcologyDrainage basinEngineeringCartographyMathematicsGeotechnical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Rivers provide critical water supply for many human societies and ecosystems, yet global knowledge of their flow rates is poor. We show that useful estimates of absolute river discharge (in cubic meters per second) may be derived solely from satellite images, with no ground-based or a priori information whatsoever. The approach works owing to discovery of a characteristic scaling law uniquely fundamental to natural rivers, here termed a river's at-many-stations hydraulic geometry. A first demonstration using Landsat Thematic Mapper images over three rivers in the United States, Canada, and China yields absolute discharges agreeing to within 20-30% of traditional in situ gauging station measurements and good tracking of flow changes over time. Within such accuracies, the door appears open for quantifying river resources globally with repeat imaging, both retroactively and henceforth into the future, with strong implications for water resource management, food security, ecosystem studies, flood forecasting, and geopolitics.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.254 · 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

Citations342
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the National Academy of SciencesSame topicFlood Risk Assessment and ManagementFrench-language works237,207