MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2289326657 · doi:10.1002/hyp.10839

Effective impervious area for runoff in urban watersheds

2016· article· en· W2289326657 on OpenAlex
Ali Ebrahimian, John S. Gulliver, Bruce Wilson

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueHydrological Processes · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicUrban Stormwater Management Solutions
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of WollongongHamline University
KeywordsImpervious surfaceEnvironmental scienceSurface runoffWatershedHydrology (agriculture)Urban runoffUrban areaRunoff curve numberWater qualityLow-impact developmentStormwaterStormwater managementGeologyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Effective impervious area (EIA), or the portion of total impervious area (TIA) that is hydraulically connected to the storm sewer system, is an important parameter in determining actual urban runoff. EIA has implications in watershed hydrology, water quality, environment, and ecosystem services. The overall goal of this study is to evaluate the application of successive weighted least square (WLS) method to urban catchments with different sizes and various hydrologic conditions to determine EIA fraction. Other objectives are to develop insights on the data selection issues, EIA fraction, EIA/TIA ratio, and runoff source area patterns in urban catchments. The successive WLS method is applied to 50 urban catchments with different sizes from less than 1 ha to more than 2000 ha in Minnesota, Wisconsin, Texas, USA as well as Europe, Canada, and Australia. The average, median, and standard deviation of EIA fractions for the 42 catchments with residential land uses are found to be 0.222, 0.200, and 0.113, respectively. These values for the EIA/TIA ratio in the same 42 catchments are 0.50, 0.48, and 0.21, respectively. While the EIA/TIA results indicate the importance of EIA, 95% prediction interval of the mean EIA/TIA is found to be 0.07 to 0.93, which shows that using an average value for this ratio in each land use to determine EIA from TIA in ungauged urban watersheds can be misleading. The successive WLS method was robust and is recommended for determining EIA in gauged urban catchments. Copyright © 2016 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 score0.296
Threshold uncertainty score0.723

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.204 · 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