MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2804091106 · doi:10.2166/wcc.2018.162

Using the Mann–Kendall test and double mass curve method to explore stream flow changes in response to climate and human activities

2018· article· en· W2804091106 on OpenAlexaff
Abdollah Pirnia, Mohammad Golshan, Hamid Darabi, Jan Adamowski, Sajad Rozbeh

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Water and Climate Change · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrology and Watershed Management Studies
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSurface runoffEnvironmental scienceHydrology (agriculture)Climate changeDry seasonTrend analysisDrainage basinStructural basinRunoff curve numberWater resourcesPeriod (music)GeographyEcologyMathematicsGeologyBiologyStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Analyzing intra-annual stream flow can reveal the main causes for runoff changes and the contributions of climate variability and human activities. For this purpose, the Mann–Kendall and cumulative rank difference (CRD) tests, and the double mass curve method, were applied to a time series of hydro-meteorological variables from 1971 to 2010 in the Tajan River basin in Iran. Results indicated that runoff changes in the wet and dry seasons after 1999 had significant respective decreasing and increasing trends, at the 0.01 confidence level, due to dam construction. In the pre-dam period (1991–1998), the results of the double mass curve method showed that climate variability and human activities contributed 57.76% and 42.24%, respectively, to the runoff decrease during the wet season. For the post-dam period (1999–2010), climate variability and anthropogenic activities contributed 24.68% and 75.32%, respectively, to the wet season runoff decrease of 116.55 mm. On the other hand, in the same period during the dry season, climate variability contributed −30.68% and human activities contributed 130.68% to the runoff increase of 41.45 mm. It is evident that runoff changes in both wet and dry seasons were mainly due to human activities associated with dam construction to meet water supply demands for agriculture.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.028
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.047

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.028
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0050.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.096
GPT teacher head0.335
Teacher spread0.239 · 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 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

Citations104
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Water and Climate ChangeSame topicHydrology and Watershed Management StudiesFrench-language works237,207