Bibliographic record
Abstract
This monograph is intended to present a personal perception of the birth, evolution and consequences of a single geological concept: the gravitational systems of groundwater flow. The concept seems to have been instrumental in redefining the scope of a single-issue water-supply problem into the many-faceted earth science sub-discipline of modern hydrogeology. It has shifted the paradigm of aquifer-bound groundwater flow to cross-formational water movement in hydraulically continuous drainage basins. This view was corroborated recently by approximately twenty-five papers presented at the Annual Meeting of the Geological Society of America, Denver, October 28–31, 2007, in the two sessions of Topic 34, ‘Regional Groundwater Flow: …’ The papers demonstrated a still lively interest in the topic 45 years after the first publication of the concept (Tóth, 1962a, 1962b), a still broadening scope of research, and an increasing variety of practical applications, as exemplified by Glaser and Siegel (2007), Gleeson and Manning (2007), Mádl-Szőnyi, (2007), Otto (2007), Rudolf and Ferguson (2007) and Winter (2007). My perception has evolved from my own research, practical experience and literature studies in hydrogeology over 47 years (Tóth, 2002, 2005, 2007). It is presented here as a distilled summary of the relevant parts of my earlier publications, lectures and courses. I hope to summarize the results and the consequences of that work in the form of a consistent, coherent and all-round story. Illustrative case studies and case histories have been taken from my field and theoretical work as well as from published literature.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.528 | 0.348 |
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".