MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2915593686 · doi:10.3390/w11020400

Allocating Water in the Mekong River Basin during the Dry Season

2019· article· en· W2915593686 on OpenAlexafffund
Liang Yuan, Weijun He, Zaiyi Liao, Dagmawi Mulugeta Degefu, Min An, Zhaofang Zhang, Xia Wu

Bibliographic record

VenueWater · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWater resources management and optimization
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsRiparian zoneWater resource managementDry seasonMekong riverPopulationEnvironmental scienceHydropowerNatural resource economicsWater rightWater resourcesGeographyEconomicsStructural basinEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With population numbers increasing and anthropogenic climate change, the amount of available fresh water is declining. This scenario can lead to an increase in the occurrence of water conflicts, especially in transboundary river basins. Prevention strategies to avert water conflicts by designing a fair, efficient, and sustainable water allocation framework are needed. Taking into account the socioeconomic and environmental differences among the riparian countries is one of the most important features an allocation scheme should have. In this article, bankruptcy and bargaining games were used to construct a new weighted water allocation model. The proposed method was applied to allocate the contested water capital of the Mekong River during the dry season. The Mekong River originates in China and flows through Myanmar, Laos, Thailand, Cambodia, and Vietnam. The results of the allocation showed that, except for China and Vietnam, all the other riparian countries get their full claim of the water demand from the river. The water allocation payoffs satisfy individual rationality, Pareto optimality, and maximization of the group utility. Therefore, the allocation outputs from the proposed scheme are self-enforceable and sustainable.

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 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 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 score0.379
Threshold uncertainty score0.686

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.154
Teacher spread0.151 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations45
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWaterSame topicWater resources management and optimizationFrench-language works237,207