MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2902638434 · doi:10.1080/10106049.2018.1552321

Regionalization of flood magnitudes using the ecological attributes of watersheds

2018· article· en· W2902638434 on OpenAlex
Bahman Jabbarian Amiri, Bahareh Baheri, Nicola Fohrer, Jan Adamowski

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueGeocarto International · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrology and Watershed Management Studies
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFlood mythWatershedHydrology (agriculture)Environmental scienceMagnitude (astronomy)Land coverStructural basinLand use100-year floodGeographyPhysical geographyEcologyGeologyComputer scienceGeotechnical engineeringGeomorphology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Estimating flood discharge at ungauged sites is a significant challenge facing water resources planners and engineers during the planning and design of hydraulic structures, managing flood prone zones, and operating artificial waterbodies. Developing more robust models to improve the reliability of flood discharge estimations is thus very useful. The role of ecological attributes including land use/land cover (LULC), hydrologic soil groups (HSG), and watershed physical characteristics (area, main stream length, average slope), and watershed shape coefficients (form, compactness, circularity, and elongation) in explaining the overall variation in flood magnitude in 39 watersheds, located in the southern basin of the Caspian Sea, was investigated. As the LULC and HSG were found to play a significant role in explaining total variation (40–89%) in flood magnitudes, their inclusion in the estimation of flood magnitudes can provide more reliable estimates of flood risk and magnitude.

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.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.063
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

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 studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.234 · 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