The Impact of Upstream Sub-Basins’ Water Use on Middle Stream and Downstream Sub-Basins’ Water Security at Country-Basin Unit Spatial Scale and Monthly Temporal Resolution
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Water, in most of the transboundary river basins, is a bone of contention among their riparian states. Taking this into account, this article assessed the monthly impact of upstream water withdrawal on the water security of middle stream and downstream sub-basins at a country-basin mesh spatial resolution. Roughly 2.18 billion people in 442 sub-basin areas experience water stress intensification by less than 1% throughout the year. In addition, 2.12 billion people in 336 sub-basin areas experience water stress level change, from no water stress to one of the water stress categories, for at least one month as the result of upstream withdrawal. Even though there is a clear upstream impact in many of the basins, water disputes with severe social, economic, political, and environmental consequences are nonexistent. This might be an indication that grave water disputes are the result of complex socio-economic and political interactions, not merely because of water deficits due to upstream water withdrawal. Therefore, understanding this relationship is crucial in identifying inflection points for water conflicts within transboundary river basins.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".