Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Stream burning is a common flow enforcement technique used to correct surface drainage patterns derived from digital elevation models (DEM). The technique involves adjusting the elevations of grid cells that are coincident with the features of a vector hydrography layer. This paper focuses on the problematic issues with common stream burning practices, particularly the topological errors resulting from the mismatched scales of the hydrography and DEM data sets. A novel alternative stream burning method is described and tested using five DEMs of varying resolutions (1 to 30 arc‐seconds) for an extensive area of southwestern Ontario, Canada. This TopologicalBreachBurn method uses total upstream channel length (TUCL) to prune the vector hydrography layer to a level of detail that matches the raster DEM grid resolution. Network pruning reduces the occurrence of erroneous stream piracy caused by the rasterization of multiple stream links to the same DEM grid cell. The algorithm also restricts flow within individual stream reaches, further reducing erroneous stream piracy. In situations where two vector stream features occupy the same grid cell, the new tool ensures that the larger stream, designated by higher TUCL, is given priority. TUCL‐based priority minimizes the impact of the topological errors that occur during the stream rasterization process on modeled regional drainage patterns. The test data demonstrated that TopologicalBreachBurn produces highly accurate and scale‐insensitive drainage patterns and watershed boundaries. The drainage divides of four large watersheds within the study region that were delineated from the TopologicalBreachBurn‐processed DEMs were found to be highly accurate when compared with the official watershed boundaries, even at the coarsest grid resolutions, with Kappa index of agreement values ranging from 0.952 to 0.921. The corresponding Kappa coefficient values for a traditional stream burning method (FillBurn) ranged from 0.953 to 0.490, demonstrating a significant decrease in mapping accuracy at coarser DEM grid resolutions. Copyright © 2015 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.
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 | 0.012 | 0.044 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".