Discharge Estimation From Dense Arrays of Pressure Transducers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In situ river discharge estimation is a critical component of studying rivers. A dominant method for establishing discharge monitoring in situ is a temporary gauge, which uses a rating curve to relate stage to discharge. However, this approach is constrained by cost and the time to develop the stage‐discharge rating curve, as rating curves rely on numerous flow measurements at high and low stages. Here, we offer a novel alternative approach to traditional temporary gauges: estimating Discharge via Arrays of Pressure Transducers (DAPT). DAPT uses a Bayesian discharge algorithm developed for the upcoming Surface Water Ocean Topography satellite (SWOT) to estimate in situ discharge from automated water surface elevation measurements. We conducted sensitivity tests over 4,954 model runs on five gauged rivers and conclude that the DAPT method can robustly reproduce discharge with an average Nash‐Sutcliffe Efficiency (NSE) of 0.79 and Kling‐Gupta Efficiency of 0.78. Further, we find that the DAPT method estimates discharge similarly to an idealized temporary gauge created from the same input data (NSE differences of less than 0.1), and that results improve significantly with accurate priors. Finally, we test the DAPT method in nine poorly gauged rivers in a realistic and complex field setting in the Peace‐Athabasca Delta, and show that the DAPT method largely outperforms a temporary gauge in this time and budget constrained setting. We therefore recommend DAPT as an effective tool for in situ discharge estimation in cases where there is not enough time or resources to develop a temporary gauge.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".