The “groundwater benefit zone”, proposals, contributions and new scientific issues
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The groundwater has great potential for water resource utilization, accounting for about a quarter of vegetation transpiration globally and contributing up to 84% in shallow groundwater areas. However, in irrigated agricultural regions or coastal areas with shallow groundwater levels, due to the high groundwater salinity, the contribution of groundwater to transpiration is small and even harmful. This paper proposes a new conception of groundwater benefit zone in the groundwater-soil-plant-atmosphere continuum (GSPAC) system. First, it analyzes the mutual feedback processes of the groundwater hydrological process and farmland ecosystem. Secondly, it elaborates on the regional water and salt movement model, proposed vital technologies based on the optimal regulation of the groundwater benefit zone, and is committed to building a synergy that considers soil salt control and groundwater yield subsidies. Finally, based on the GSPAC system water-salt coupling transport mechanism, quantitative model of groundwater benefit zone, and technical parameters of regional water-salt regulation and control, the scientific problems and development opportunities related to the conception of groundwater benefit zone have been prospected.
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 | 0.008 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.014 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".