Agricultural hydroinformatics: agricultural water systems management as a new application for hydroinformatics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Hydroinformatics, throughout its more than 25 years of existence, has been applied to a set of research areas. So far, these applications include: hydraulics and hydrology, environmental science and technology, knowledge systems and knowledge management, urban water systems management. This paper introduces agricultural water systems management as a new application for hydroinformatics, and terms it as “agricultural hydroinformatics”. It presents a discipline-delineated conceptual framework originating from the particularities of the socio-technical dimension of applying hydroinformatics in agriculture. It epitomizes the wholeness and inter-dependencies of agricultural systems studies and modelling. It is suitable to support, not only integrated agricultural water resources management in particular, but also agricultural sustainability in general, in addition to a wide range of agricultural development situations beyond connections between agro-economic and water engineering development and its socio-economic impacts. The paper also highlights some contributions of hydroinformatics to agriculture including new kinds of sensing technologies, information and simulation models development that bear the potential to boost reproducibility of agricultural systems research through systematic and formal records of the relationships among raw data, the processes that produce results and the results themselves.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.013 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.026 | 0.009 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".