MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4220933469 · doi:10.5194/egusphere-egu22-10394

Using public cloud computing infrastructure for rapid simulations of large-scale global reservoirs

2022· preprint· en· W4220933469 on OpenAlexaff
P. Hazenberg, Albrecht Weerts, Bart van Osnabrugge, Ivo Miltenburg, Willem van Verseveld

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrology and Watershed Management Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCloud computingComputer scienceWorkflowHydropowerEnvironmental scienceDistributed computingOperating systemDatabaseEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Water reservoirs play an important role in relation to water security, flood risk, agriculture production, hydropower, hydropower potential, and environmental flows. However, long-term daily information on reservoir volume, inflow and outflow dynamics are not publicly available. To enable deriving long-term reservoir dynamics for many reservoirs across the globe using a distributed hydrological model, large amounts of computer power are needed. Therefore, these types of simulations are generally performed on super computers. Nowadays, public cloud computing infrastructure offers interesting alternative and allows one to quickly access hundreds to thousands of computer nodes. The current work presents an example of making use of the public cloud offers by simulating the dynamics of 3236 headwater reservoirs on a Kubernetes Cluster on Microsoft Azure. Within the cloud, distributed model forcing and hydrological parameters at a 1-km grid resolution were derived using HydroMT, which subsequently were used by wflow_sbm to perform long-term hydrological simulation over the period 1970-2020. To enable operation in the cloud, usage is made of the Argo workflow engine, that is effective able to schedule the sequential execution of the HydroMT and wflow_sbm containers. Using this setup, all model simulation results were obtained in less than a week. We will present the executed modeling setup within the public cloud as well as present some of the results derived in this manner by comparing observations with in situ and satellite observations.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.039
Threshold uncertainty score0.078

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.035
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.269 · 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
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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicHydrology and Watershed Management Studies→French-language works237,207→