MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4312791098 · doi:10.14796/jwmm.c493

A Width Parameter Estimation Through Equivalent Rectangle Methodology for Hydraulic Modeling Applications

2022· article· en· W4312791098 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
José Ricardo Bonilla Brenes, Rafael Oreamuno Vega, Jochen Hack

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Water Management Modeling · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrology and Watershed Management Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersLeibniz-GemeinschaftConsejo Nacional de RectoresDeutscher Akademischer Austauschdienst
KeywordsRectangleEstimation theoryStructural basinMathematicsAlgorithmGeologyGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

EPA SWMM hydraulic modeling requires the estimation of different parameters allowing the determination of the basin's response upon a given precipitation event. Some physical parameters, such as area or perimeter, are measurable and can be accurately determined; however, other parameter estimation presents greater uncertainty, such as the width parameter. For regular and uniform drainage areas, width parameter estimation is relatively simple; however, when a complete irregular basin analysis is required, width determination presents greater uncertainty, and its representativeness becomes complicated to define. Width determination is idealized with the representation of a rectangle, where, for an equal area, a higher width will result in a faster response of the basin, while a lower width will result in a slower response of the basin. This paper attempts to estimate a representative value of width for a realistic, irregularly shaped basin by defining the equivalent rectangle, which takes into account the area, perimeter, and compactness index of the basin. The compactness index can be used to classify the basin by its shape. The shape of the basin is an indicator of how the precipitation histograms are temporally distributed and how the water flows through the basin, i.e., it defines the response speed of the basin, as the width parameter does in modeling. The width parameter has a high sensitivity in the EPA SWMM modeling results; therefore, an inaccurate estimation of the parameter leads to unrepresentative results. For this reason, this study seeks to find an optimal methodology to reduce modeling uncertainty and achieve more accurate simulations of an irregular watershed's hydrological response.

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 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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.711
Threshold uncertainty score0.521

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.084
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.223 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations2
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Water Management ModelingSame topicHydrology and Watershed Management StudiesFrench-language works237,207