Understanding the Effects of Parameter Uncertainty on Temporal Dynamics of Groundwater-Surface Water Interaction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study presents the understanding of temporal dynamics of groundwater-surface water (GW-SW) interaction due to parameter uncertainty by using a physically-based and distributed gridded surface subsurface hydrologic analysis (GSSHA) model combined with a Monte Carlo simulation. A study area along the main stem of the Kiskatinaw River of the Kiskatinaw River watershed, Northeast British Columbia, Canada, was used as a case study. Two different greenhouse gas (GHG) emission scenarios (i.e., A2: heterogeneous world with self-reliance and preservation of local identities, and B1: a more integrated and environmental-friendly world) of the Special Report on Emissions Scenarios (SRES) from the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) for 2013 were used as case scenarios. Before conducting uncertainty analysis, a sensitivity analysis was performed to find the most sensitive parameters to the model output (i.e., mean monthly groundwater contribution to stream flow). Then, a Monte Carlo simulation was used to conduct the uncertainty analysis. The uncertainty analysis results under both case scenarios revealed that the pattern of the cumulative relative frequency distribution of the mean monthly and annual groundwater contributions to stream flow varied monthly and annually, respectively, due to the uncertainties of the sensitive model parameters. In addition, the pattern of the cumulative relative frequency distribution of a particular month’s groundwater contribution to the stream flow differed significantly between both scenarios. These results indicated the complexities and uncertainties in the GW-SW interaction system. Therefore, it is of necessity to use such uncertainty analysis results rather than the point estimates for better water resources management decision-making.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".