MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2435680987

A Geo-statistical Approach to the Change Procedure Study of Under-Ground Water Table in a GIS Framework, Case Study: Razan-Ghahavand Plain, Hamedan Province, Iran

2012· article· en· W2435680987 on OpenAlex

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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
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

VenueJournal of academic and applied studies · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSoil Geostatistics and Mapping
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsKrigingEstimatorStatisticsMathematicsMean squared errorInterpolation (computer graphics)WeightingInverse distance weightingSampling (signal processing)Multivariate interpolationBilinear interpolationComputer science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Qualitative and quantitative parameters of underground water resources could be studied by taking discrete samples at different locations in study area. In this way, for change procedure study of mentioned parameters and to gain a deeper understanding of the phenomena, a continues surface need to be generated. The main purpose of Geo-Statistical analysis is creating or interpolating a continuous surface from discrete sample points; in the other hand, Geo-statistical Analyst, derives a surface using values from the measured sampling points to predict values for each location in the landscape. The ultimate goal is to produce a surface of predicted target values. In Geo-Statistics, there are two main categories for interpolation: deterministic and geostatistical. The first category, based on the similarity and distance from measured points (Inverse Distance Weighting, Global Polynomial Interpolation, and Local Polynomial Interpolation) or the degree of smoothing (Radial Basis Functions); and second category employs some statistical properties of observed samples (Kriging and Co-Kriging). This paper utilizes Geo-statistics for the estimation of underground water table at location of interest where measured values are not available. In this regard, by employing Kriging, IDW and RBF procedures, underground water table contours have been created. For best estimator selection, results have been validated by some statistical indices such as Mean Absolute Error (MAE), Mean Absolute Relative Error (MARE), Root Mean Square Error (RMSE), Mean Biased Error (MBE) and Coefficient of Correlation. Absolute relative error variation curve for the number of sample points used for examination of efficiency and accuracy of each GeoStatistical estimators. Eventually, Kriging method has been selected as the best method to estimate the underground water table of Razan-Ghahavand plain. In order to Kriging estimations, direction of underground flow, which is the major relevant issue to Hydro-Geologic studies, has been gained.

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)0.001
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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.168
Threshold uncertainty score0.445

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.073
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.243 · 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