MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2585919616

Sensitivity Analysis of Environmental Flow Rule Curves for Water Allocation Optimization: Case Study, the Upper Oldman River Basin, Alberta, Canada

2012· article· en· W2585919616 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
M. Reza Ghanbarpour, H. S. Wheater, Patricia Gober

Bibliographic record

VenueScholarsArchive (Brigham Young University) · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWater resources management and optimization
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSensitivity (control systems)Structural basinEnvironmental flowHydrology (agriculture)Stream flowDrainage basinWater resource managementGeologyGeographyEnvironmental scienceGeomorphologyCartographyClimatologyEngineeringGeotechnical engineering
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Water allocation models use a set of decision rule curves to define constraints and priorities for optimal allocation of limited water supply to all water demands and requirements at the river basin scale. These rules are necessary to achieve optimal tradeoff between different river basin management goals (e.g. environment protection, urban development, agricultural expansion). However, many operating rules need to be modified as water demands and river basin priorities change over time due to socio-political forces and climate change. In particular, environmental flow criteria are of major interest; they can raise challenges for resource allocation, and represent an important interface between societal values and operational policy. In this research, a sensitivity analysis of alternate environmental flow rule curves (EFRCs) is examined for different hydrologic regimes. EFRCs are developed using hydrologic methods including flow duration curves, baseflow separation, and Tessman methods. The Water Resources Management Model (WRMM), developed by Alberta Environment, is used in this research. The Upper Oldman River Basin, one of the headwaters of the trans-boundary South Saskatchewan River Basin (SSRB) in western Canada, is used as a case study. The main objective of this research is to develop different EFRCs to understand their sensitivities to alternative future scenarios. All three operational EFRCs are compared using a group of performance criteria: reliability, resilience, and vulnerability. Results show that water allocation performance is very sensitive to the different EFRCs. The Q90 rule curves are superior to the other rules in several respects, and provide optimal trade-off between different water demands including environmental flow and junior irrigation sectors. However, further work is required to evaluate their ecological impact for practical application.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.271
Threshold uncertainty score0.545

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.168
Teacher spread0.162 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScholarsArchive (Brigham Young University)Same topicWater resources management and optimizationFrench-language works237,207