MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2747682299 · doi:10.3390/w9080602

Distributed Hydrological Modeling: Determination of Theoretical Hydraulic Potential & Streamflow Simulation of Extreme Hydrometeorological Events

2017· article· en· W2747682299 on OpenAlexaffabout
Sara Patricia Ibarra‐Zavaleta, Rosario Landgrave, Rabindranarth Romero-López, Annie Poulin, Raúl Arango-Miranda

Bibliographic record

VenueWater · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrology and Watershed Management Studies
Canadian institutionsÉcole de Technologie SupérieureUniversité du Québec à Montréal
FundersConsejo Nacional de Ciencia y Tecnología
KeywordsHydrometeorologyEnvironmental scienceStreamflowCalibrationHydrology (agriculture)PrecipitationStandard deviationDrainage basinMeteorologyStatisticsMathematicsGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The progressive change in climatic conditions worldwide has increased frequency and severity of extreme hydrometeorological events (EHEs). México is an example that has been affected by the occurrence of EHE leading to economic, social, and environmental losses. The objective of this research was to apply a Canadian distributed hydrological model (DHM) to tropical conditions and to evaluate its capacity to simulate flows in a basin in the central Gulf of Mexico. In addition, the DHM (once calibrated and validated) was used to calculate the theoretical hydraulic power (THP) and the performance to predict streamflow before the presence of an EHE. The results of the DHM show that the goodness of fit indicators between the observed and simulated flows in the calibration process Nash-Sutcliffe efficiency (NSE) = 0.83, ratio of the root mean square error to the standard deviation of measured data (RSR) = 0.41, and percent bias (PBIAS) = −4.3) and validation (NSE = 0.775, RSR = 0.4735, and PBIAS = 2.45) are satisfactory. The DHM showed its applicability: determination of THP showed that the mean flows are in synchrony with the order of the river reaches and streamflow simulation of 13 EHEs (NSE = 0.78 ± 0.13, RSR = 0.46 ± 0.14 and PBIAS = −0.48 ± 7.5) confirmed a reliable efficiency. This work can serve as a tool for identifying vulnerabilities before floods and for the rational and sustainable management of water resources.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.251
Threshold uncertainty score0.500

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.230 · 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

Citations11
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWaterSame topicHydrology and Watershed Management StudiesFrench-language works237,207