MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4311519560 · doi:10.1111/nrm.12364

Parameter allocation approach for runoff simulation in an arid catchment using the KINEROS2 hydrological model

2022· article· en· W4311519560 on OpenAlex

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

VenueNatural Resource Modeling · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrology and Watershed Management Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHydrographSurface runoffContext (archaeology)CalibrationHydraulic conductivityMagnitude (astronomy)Environmental scienceHydrology (agriculture)MathematicsStatisticsSoil scienceGeologyPhysicsGeotechnical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The KINEROS2 model was utilized for runoff simulation in the Dehgin catchment situated in the Hormozgan province of Iran. A parameter allocation procedure was used in lieu of parameter optimization. After parameter allocation, the model was able to adequately simulate hydrographs associated with high‐magnitude peak discharge events with the efficiency values between 0.011–0.83 for Nash–Sutcliffe and 0.36–0.98 for Kling–Gupta, but the model did not accurately simulate hydrographs corresponding to low‐magnitude peak discharge events. Although calibration after parameter allocation improved model performance with respect to the simulation of low‐magnitude discharge events, numerical values of the hydraulic conductivity and net capillary pressure as the most sensitive model parameters did not agree with parameters known to be reasonable in the region. So that the value of hydraulic conductivity was decreased from 61 to 55 mm/h in channels and from 3.7 to 1.7 mm/h in planes. The new values are physically reasonable but are not approximately the same as physical values associated with the regional and environmental context of the Dehgin catchment. In this case, the values of the evaluation criteria were obtained between −2.5 and 0.78 for Nash–Sutcliffe and 0.17 and 0.98 for Kling–Gupta. The results of using the HydroPSO package in R to automated calibration of the model, with the value of Nash–Sutcliffe between −0.63 and 0.43, indicated that autocalibration without intelligent and deliberate selection of parameters cannot accurately represent hydrological processes, and therefore should be avoided. Also, the results show that an understanding of the catchment environmental conditions and appropriate allocation of parameters is initially more effective as a first step of the modeling process and thereby contributes to a first‐order characterization of environmental conditions in the catchment.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.222
Threshold uncertainty score0.484

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.057
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.234 · 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