MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2588054745

Regionalization of IHACRES Model Parameters for In-tegrated Assessment across the Lake Erie, northern Ohio USA basin

2006· article· en· W2588054745 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Richard M. Anderson, Jonathan L. Goodall

Bibliographic record

VenueScholarsArchive (Brigham Young University) · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrology and Watershed Management Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStructural basinGeographyGeologyArchaeologyPhysical geographyGeomorphology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract: The IHACRES model is being applied in a regionalization approach to develop streamflow predic-tions within the region of Northern Ohio, U.S.A. that drains into Lake Erie, located on the border between the U.S. and Canada. The approach to-date is based on independent univariate regressions of model parameters on watershed attributes for a collection of 11 watersheds. Anderson et al. (2005) used one of these regression relationships to represent possible effects of declining forest cover on streamflow, but did not obtain regional models for the parameters of the routing model of IHACRES. Here we apply and “validate ” a regionaliza-tion approach to estimating the full set of parameters of the IHACRES hydrologic model for integrated as-sessment across the Lake Erie, northern Ohio USA basin. We also propose that future research should focus on (1) increasing the quality of rainfall estimates as an important way to potentially improve simulation per-formance; (2) developing joint probability distributions over the full set of IHACRES model parameters to improve estimates of predictive uncertainty; and (3) developing estimates of actual forest cover trends to ob-tain more useful predictions of future trends in streamflow.

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 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 score0.111
Threshold uncertainty score0.938

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.216 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScholarsArchive (Brigham Young University)Same topicHydrology and Watershed Management StudiesFrench-language works237,207