A Modified Distributed CN-VSA Method for Mapping of the Seasonally Variable Source Areas
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Many watershed models employ the Soil Conservation Service Curve Number (SCS-CN) approach for runoff simulation based on soil and land use information. These models implicitly assume that runoff is generated by the Hortonian process and; therefore, cannot correctly account for the effects of topography, variable source area (VSA) and/or soil moisture distribution in a watershed. This paper presents a new distributed CN-VSA method that is based on the SCS-CN approach to estimate runoff amount and uses the topographic wetness index (TWI) to distribute the runoff-generating areas within the watershed spatially. The size of the saturated-watershed areas and their spatial locations are simulated by assuming an average annual value of potential maximum retention. However, the literature indicates significant seasonal variation in potential maximum retention which can considerably effect water balance and amount of nonpoint source pollution. This paper focuses on developing a modified distributed CN-VSA method that accounts for the seasonal changes in the potential maximum retention. The results indicate that the modified distributed CN-VSA approach is better than distributed CN-VSA to simulate runoff amount and spatial distribution of runoff-generating areas. Overall, the study results are significant for improved understanding of hydrological response of watershed where seasonal factors describe the potential maximum retention, and, thus, saturation excess runoff generation in the watershed.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".