MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4289522267 · doi:10.3390/w14152390

Water Recharges Suitability in Kabul Aquifer System within the Upper Indus Basin

2022· article· en· W4289522267 on OpenAlex
Qasim Mahdawi, Jay Sagin, Мalis Absametov, Abdulhalim Zaryab

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueWater · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicGroundwater and Watershed Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaAlberta Environment and Protected Areas
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGroundwater rechargeAquiferHydrology (agriculture)GroundwaterThematic mapWater tableDrainage densityWater resource managementEnvironmental scienceGeologyStructural basinGeographyGeomorphologyGeotechnical engineeringCartography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Groundwater is the main source of water for drinking, household use, and irrigation in Kabul; however, the water table is dropping due to the excessive extraction over the past two decades. The groundwater restoration criteria selection mainly depends on the techniques used to recharge the aquifer. The design of infiltration basins, for example, requires different technical criteria than the installation of infiltration wells. The different set of parameters is relevant to water being infiltrated at the surface in comparison with water being injected into the aquifers. Restoration of the groundwater resources are complicated and expensive tasks. An inexpensive preliminary investigation of the potential recharge areas, especially in developing countries such as Afghanistan with its complex Upper Indus River Basin, can be reasonably explored. The present research aims to identify the potential recharge sites through employing GIS and Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) and combining remote sensing information with in situ and geospatial data obtained from related organizations in Afghanistan. These data sets were employed to document nine thematic layers which include slope, drainage density, rainfall, distance to fault, distance to river channel, lithology, and ground water table, land cover, and soil texture. All of the thematic layers were allocated and ranked, based on previous studies, and field surveys and extensive questionnaire surveys carried out with Afghan experts. Based on the collected and processed data output, the groundwater recharge values were determined. These recharge values were grouped into four classes assessing the suitability for recharge as very high (100%), high (63%), moderate (26%), and low (10%). The relative importance of the various geospatial layers was identified and shows that slope (19.2%) is the most important, and faults (3.8%) the least important. The selection of climatic characteristics and geological characteristics as the most important criteria in the artificial recharge of the aquifer are investigated in many regions with good access to data and opportunities for validation and verifications. However, in regions with limited data due to the complexities in collecting data in Afghanistan, proper researching with sufficient data is a challenge. The novelty of this research is the cross-disciplinary approach with incorporation of a compiled set of input data with the set of various criteria (nine criteria based on which layers are formed, including slope, drainage density, rainfall, distance to fault, distance to river channel, lithology, ground water table, land cover, and soil texture) and experts’ questionnaires. The AHP methodology expanded with the cross-disciplinary approach by adding the local experts´ questionnaires survey can be very handy in areas with limited access to data, to provide the preliminary investigations, and reduce expenses on the localized expensive and often dangerous field works.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.680
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.002

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.195
Teacher spread0.184 · 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