Dynamically Coupling System Dynamics and SWAT+ Models using Tinamït: Applications of Modular Tools for Coupled Human-Water Systems Models
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. Participatory water resources management requires modeling techniques that are accurate and flexible, yet stakeholder-friendly. While different modeling frameworks offer advantages and disadvantages, System Dynamics (SD) models have seen sustained use as a stakeholder-friendly approach for water resources modelling. In contrast, physically-based models are more appropriate to model the hydrological components of coupled human-water systems. Proposed as a way to combine the relative strengths of both modelling paradigms, model coupling allows researchers to build participatory SD models with stakeholders, while delegating the hydrological components of the overall model to an external hydrological model. Recently developed to facilitate model coupling, the Tinamït Python package presents an extensible outward-facing Application Programming Interface (API). It allows for the development of extensions (wrappers) that expand compatibility with different physically-based models. However, no watershed hydrological model has yet been connected to this API. In the present study, a socket and JavaScript Object Notation-based communication protocol was developed with the goal of facilitating the coupling of models written in languages such as FORTRAN. This novel protocol served to develop a Tinamït-compatible wrapper for the hydrological model SWAT+, allowing it to be coupled to human-water SD models. The novel coupling protocol was then applied to a case study of Tanzania’s Usa Basin. This approach provides the modeler with the benefits of both physically-based and SD models, thereby allowing the detection of potential far-reaching effects of policy decisions, within a system that remains flexible and easily adaptable to other watersheds.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".