MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Fundamental Hydrologic Equations

2019· other· en· W2997750888 on OpenAlexaff
Roger Beckie

Bibliographic record

VenueEncyclopedia of Water · 2019
Typeother
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGranular flow and fluidized beds
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConservation lawConservation of massBasis (linear algebra)MathematicsApplied mathematicsCalculus (dental)Computer scienceHydrology (agriculture)PhysicsMathematical analysisGeologyGeometryMechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The principles of mass, momentum and energy conservation are fundamental to quantitative hydrology. Physically based models in hydrology respect these principles, in contrast to many statistical models, which may not. These conservation principles are most clearly expressed when written as mathematical equations. One may view mathematics as a “grammar” and “language” to communicate the “literature” of physical principles. In this chapter, we shall therefore focus mostly upon the mathematical development of the conservation principles and their manifestation in hydrology. In this way, we hope that our development will give physical meaning to the fundamental hydrologic equations. We will assume that reader has an elementary understanding of multivariate calculus and differential equations. We first state the fundamental principles and then outline the general ways that mathematical expressions for these principles are formulated. We then develop general mathematical equations for each principle for the specific case of a flowing fluid, which in hydrology is usually water. These general equations are typically then used as the basis for expressions used in hydrology. We conclude the chapter with a sequence of examples from hydrology to show how the principles are manifest in expressions that describe hydrologic processes.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.035

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.002

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.192
Teacher spread0.186 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEncyclopedia of WaterSame topicGranular flow and fluidized bedsFrench-language works237,207