MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3100137748 · doi:10.1175/jhm-d-20-0162.1

Modeling the Snowmelt Runoff Process of the Tizinafu River Basin, Northwest China, with GLDAS Data and Bayesian Uncertainty Analysis

2020· article· en· W3100137748 on OpenAlexaff
Wenyi Xie, Xiankui Zeng, Dongwei GUI, Jichun Wu, Dong Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Hydrometeorology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrology and Watershed Management Studies
Canadian institutionsMinistry of Education and Child Care
FundersFundamental Research Funds for the Central UniversitiesNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsBaseflowStreamflowEnvironmental scienceSnowmeltHydrographSurface runoffHydrology (agriculture)Runoff modelPrecipitationHydrometeorologyDrainage basinData assimilationClimatologySnowMeteorologyGeologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The climate of the Tizinafu River basin is characterized by low temperature and sparse precipitation, and snow and glacier melt serve as the main water resource in this area. Modeling the snowmelt runoff process has great significance for local ecosystems and residents. The total streamflow of the Tizinafu River basin was divided into surface streamflow and baseflow. The surface streamflow was estimated using the routing model (RM) with Noah runoff data from Global Land Data Assimilation (GLDAS), and the parameter uncertainty of the RM was quantified through Markov chain Monte Carlo simulation. Additionally, the 10 commonly used baseflow separation methods of four categories [digital filter, hydrograph separation program (HYSEP), baseflow index, and Kalinlin methods] were used to generate the baseflow and were then evaluated by their performance in total streamflow simulation. The results demonstrated that the RM driven by GLDAS runoff data could reproduce the runoff process of the Tizinafu River basin. RM-Hl (local minimum HYSEP method) achieved the best performance in the total streamflow simulation, with Nash–Sutcliffe efficiency (NSE) coefficients of 0.82 and 0.93, relative errors of −0.40% and 10.50%, and observation inclusion ratios C of 62.07% and 68.52% for the calibration and verification periods, respectively. The local minimum HYSEP method was most suitable for describing the baseflow of the Tizinafu River basin among the 10 baseflow separation methods. However, digital filter methods exhibited weak performance in baseflow separation.

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)0.001
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 score0.052
Threshold uncertainty score0.275

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.216 · 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

Citations1
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of HydrometeorologySame topicHydrology and Watershed Management StudiesFrench-language works237,207