Hybrid modelling approach to prairie hydrology: fusing data-driven and process-based hydrological models
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Much of the prairie region in North America is characterized by relatively flat terrain with many depressions on the landscape. The hydrological response (runoff) is a combination of the conventional runoff from the contributing areas and the occasional overflow from the non-contributing areas (depressions). In this study, we promote the use of a hybrid modelling structure to predict runoff generation from prairie landscapes. More specifically, the Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT) is fused with artificial neural networks (ANNs), so that SWAT and the ANN module deal with the contributing and non-contributing areas, respectively. A detailed experimental study is performed to select the best set of inputs, training algorithms and hidden neurons. The results obtained in this study suggest that the fusion of process-based and data-driven models can provide improved modelling capabilities for representing the highly nonlinear nature of the hydrological processes in prairie landscapes. Editor D. Koutsoyiannis; Associate editor L. See
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it