Conjunctive Water Management under Multiple Uncertainties: A Case Study of the Amu Darya River Basin, Central Asia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
With population growth, climate volatility, and economic expansion, the conjunctive management of surface–groundwater (SGW) faces great challenges. In this study, a hybrid factorial optimization programming (HFOP) method is developed through integrating factorial analysis, interval linear programming, flexible fuzzy programming, and two-stage stochastic programming into a general framework. HFOP can effectively reflect the multiple uncertainties and quantitatively identify the effects of multiple factors. Then, a HFOP-SGW model is formulated for the middle reaches of the Amu Darya River Basin, where 125 scenarios are analyzed. Some of the major findings are: (i) the improvement of surface-water transport efficiency and the proper use of groundwater can effectively alleviate regional water shortage; (ii) agricultural users have a high risk of water scarcity for all states, especially under a low-flow level; (iii) uncertainties of water-flow levels and risk-reverse attitudes of decision makers have significant impacts on the system’s benefits and water-allocation scheme; and (iv) the surface-water-transmission loss rate and risk perceptions of decision makers are the main factors affecting the system’s benefit’s and water-allocation scheme. These findings can help decision makers obtain desired water-allocation strategies to respond to the variations in water availability.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".