MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2074260210 · doi:10.1002/ldr.589

A decision support system for soil and water conservation measures on agricultural watersheds

2004· article· en· W2074260210 on OpenAlex
A. Sarangi, Chandra A. Madramootoo, C. A. Cox

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueLand Degradation and Development · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrology and Watershed Management Studies
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSoil conservationWatershedEnvironmental scienceCroppingLand useWatershed managementDecision support systemAgricultureWater resource managementHydrology (agriculture)Environmental resource managementComputer scienceEngineeringEcologyCivil engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Integrated watershed management (IWM) is vital in achieving agricultural sustainability in terms of both production and environmental protection. A decision support system (DSS) is useful in generating alternative decision scenarios for management of natural resources, facilitating the implementation of IWM concepts in an interactive and holistic way. The decision to implement an appropriate land use coupled with suitable soil and water conservation techniques not only enhances watershed health but also prevents sediment losses. Besides reducing basin fertility, such losses decrease the storage capacity of downstream reservoirs through silt deposition, which can, in turn, give rise to low biomass production and poorer flood control. In order to facilitate IWM, an effort was made to develop, in the Visual Basic programming language, a soil and water conservation DSS which considered both structural and cropping practices for arresting sediment loss. Input parameters to the DSS for a given tract of land included: mean slope; sediment loss; soil type; and land capability class (LCC). Outputs included decision criteria to choose among alternative structural measures and suggested cropping systems to serve as biological measures to reduce soil loss and conserve water. Structural watershed management measures included a variety of soil and water conservation structures widely adopted by farming communities throughout the world. The DSS is capable of providing sediment control solutions not only for small watersheds but also for larger drainage basins, by dividing the basin into smaller watersheds. The DSS was validated for a watershed on the Caribbean island of St Lucia and used to suggest measures for a 10° slope under specific soil type, sediment loss and LCC conditions. The measures proposed included bench terraces, graded contour bunds, conservation ditches, concrete chute spillways, diversion dams and conservation cropping systems. The measures actually adopted on‐site were conservation ditches, graded contour bunds and conservation cropping systems, a close parallel to the DSS's proposed measures. On slopes ranging from 5–55°, implementation of the suggested control measures resulted in a 34–37 per cent reduction in soil loss on the watershed. Copyright © 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.156
Threshold uncertainty score0.220

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.208
Teacher spread0.191 · 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