MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3048420536

Streamflow Data Assimilation in SWAT Model Using Extended Kalman Filter

2014· article· en· W3048420536 on OpenAlexaff
Leqiang Sun, Ioan Nistor, Ousmane Seidou

Bibliographic record

VenueAGU Fall Meeting Abstracts · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrology and Watershed Management Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStreamflowFlood forecastingEnsemble Kalman filterEnvironmental scienceData assimilationWatershedClimatologySWAT modelSoil and Water Assessment ToolKalman filterMeteorologyExtended Kalman filterFlood mythMathematicsHydrology (agriculture)StatisticsComputer scienceGeographyDrainage basinGeology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary The Extended Kalman Filter (EKF) is coupled with the Soil and Water Assessment Tools (SWAT) model in the streamflow assimilation of the upstream Senegal River in West Africa. Given the large number of distributed variables in SWAT, only the average watershed scale variables are included in the state vector and the Hydrological Response Unit (HRU) scale variables are updated with the a posteriori / a priori ratio of their watershed scale counterparts. The Jacobian matrix is calculated numerically by perturbing the state variables. Both the soil moisture and CN2 are significantly updated in the wet season, yet they have opposite update patterns. A case study for a large flood forecast shows that for up to seven days, the streamflow forecast is moderately improved using the EKF-subsequent open loop scheme but significantly improved with a newly designed quasi-error update scheme. The former has better performances in the flood rising period while the latter has better performances in the recession period. For both schemes, the streamflow forecast is improved more significantly when the lead time is shorter.

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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.049
Threshold uncertainty score0.097

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.224 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAGU Fall Meeting Abstracts→Same topicHydrology and Watershed Management Studies→French-language works237,207→