Determination of subcatchment and watershed boundaries in a complex and highly urbanized landscape
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Urban development significantly alters the landscape by introducing widespread impervious surfaces, which quickly convey surface run‐off to streams via stormwater sewer networks, resulting in “flashy” hydrological responses. Here, we present the inadequacies of using raster‐based digital elevation models and flow‐direction algorithms to delineate large and highly urbanized watersheds and propose an alternative approach that accounts for the influence of anthropogenically modified land cover. We use a semi‐automated approach that incorporates conventional drainage networks into overland flow paths and define the maximal run‐off contributing area. In this approach, stormwater pipes are clustered according to their slope attributes, which define flow direction. Land areas drained by each cluster and contributing (or exporting) flow to a topographically delineated catchment were determined. These land masses were subsequently added or removed from the catchment, modifying both the shape and the size. Our results in a highly urbanized Toronto, Canada, area watershed indicate a moderate net increase in the directly connected watershed area by 3% relative to a topographically forced method; however, differences across three smaller scale subcatchments are greater. Compared to topographic delineation, the directly connected watershed areas of both the upper and middle subcatchments decrease by 5% and 8%, respectively, whereas the lower subcatchment area increases by 15%. This is directly related to subsurface storm sewer pipes that cross topographic boundaries. When directly connected subcatchment area is plotted against total streamflow and flashiness indices using this method, the coefficients of variation are greater (0.93 to 0.97) compared to the use of digital elevation model‐derived subcatchment areas (0.78 to 0.85). The accurate identification of watershed and subcatchment boundaries should incorporate ancillary data such as stormwater sewer networks and retention basin drainage areas to reduce water budget errors in urban systems.
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".