<scp>SWAT</scp>model: A Multi‐Operating System, Multi‐Platform <scp>SWAT</scp> Model Package in R
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT) model (Arnold et al., 1998) is a popular watershed management tool. Currently, the SWAT model, actively supported by the U.S. Department of Agriculture and Texas A&M, operates only on Microsoft® Windows, which hinders modelers that use other operating systems (OS). This technical note introduces the Comprehensive R Archive Network (CRAN) distributed “SWATmodel” package which allows SWAT 2005 and 2012 to be widely distributed and run as a linear model‐like function on multiple OS and processor platforms. This allows researchers anywhere in the world using virtually any OS to run SWAT. In addition to simplifying the use of SWAT across computational platforms, the SWATmodel package allows SWAT modelers to utilize the analytical capabilities, statistical libraries, modeling tools, and programming flexibility inherent to R. The software allows watershed modelers to develop a simple hydrological watershed model conceptualization of the SWAT model and to obtain a first approximation of the minimum expected results a more complicated model should deliver. As a proof of concept, we test the SWAT model by initializing and calibrating 314 U.S. Geological Survey stream gages in the Chesapeake Bay watershed and present the results.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.067 | 0.040 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".