Groundwater depletion in Central Mexico: Use of GRACE and InSAR to support water resources management
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Groundwater deficits occur in several areas of Central Mexico, where water resource assessment is limited by the availability and reliability of field data. In this context, GRACE and InSAR are used to remotely assess groundwater storage loss in one of Mexico's most important watersheds in terms of size and economic activity: the Lerma‐Santiago‐Pacifico (LSP). In situ data and Land Surface Models are used to subtract soil moisture and surface water storage changes from the total water storage change measured by GRACE satellites. As a result, groundwater mass change time‐series are obtained for a 12 years period. ALOS‐PALSAR images acquired from 2007 to 2011 were processed using the SBAS‐InSAR algorithm to reveal areas subject to ground motion related to groundwater over‐exploitation. In the perspective of providing guidance for groundwater management, GRACE and InSAR observations are compared with official water budgets and field observations. InSAR‐derived subsidence mapping generally agrees well with official water budgets, and shows that deficits occur mainly in cities and irrigated agricultural areas. GRACE does not entirely detect the significant groundwater losses largely reported by official water budgets, literature and InSAR observations. The difference is interpreted as returns of wastewater to the groundwater flow systems, which limits the watershed scale groundwater depletion but suggests major impacts on groundwater quality. This phenomenon is enhanced by ground fracturing as noticed in the field. Studying the fate of the extracted groundwater is essential when comparing GRACE data with higher resolution observations, and particularly in the perspective of further InSAR/GRACE combination in hydrogeology.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".