MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4322212942 · doi:10.5194/egusphere-egu23-16122

Making water models more inclusive and interdisciplinary to underpin sustainable development

2023· preprint· en· W4322212942 on OpenAlexaff
Syed Mustafa, Pertti Ala‐aho, Hannu Marttila, Marijke Huysmans, Jean‐Christophe Comte, Mohammad Shamsudduha, Gert Ghysels, Oliver S. Schilling, Richard Hoffmann, Pekka M. Rossi, Tamara Avellán, Ali Torabi Haghighi, Luk Peeters, Manuel Pulido-Velázquez, Marie Larocque, Anne F. Van Loon, Ty P. A. Ferré, Philip Brunner, Harrie‐Jan Hendricks Franssen, Bjørn Kløve

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWater resources management and optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
FundersNatural Environment Research CouncilSight Research UK
KeywordsComputer scienceProcess (computing)Reliability (semiconductor)HazardWater resourcesRisk analysis (engineering)Conceptual modelSustainable developmentManagement scienceOperations researchEngineeringBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Reliable predictions of water systems’ response to external pressures and ongoing changes are highly important to ensure informed decision-making to support sustainable water resources management for human use and the functioning of healthy ecosystems. Recent strong development of numerical models offers a potential to understand and forecast water systems under anthropogenic and climatic influences to provide information for decision-making, process understanding of the ‘unseen’ part of the water cycle and hazard risk analysis. However, the reliability of numerical model predictions is strongly influenced by various sources of uncertainties, data qualities and assumptions, and often lacks stakeholders' point-of-view. A new, improved approach is needed and in this paper, we present six basic principles to improve the reliability and accuracy of numerical water model predictions considering explicitly stakeholders' needs and, thereby, better serving the society. Six highlighted principles are: (i) clearly defining the objectives and the purpose of the model, sustaining them during the entire modelling process; (ii) incorporating expert and local community knowledge through stakeholders' feedback; (iii) implementing a multi-model approach in which a range of conceptualizations are explored ; (iv) considering and representing the uncertainties arising from model inputs, parameters, conceptual model structure and measurement/information error; (v) translating the results to concrete and understandable strategies that policymakers can use for their informed decision-making; and (vi) long term capacity building and monitoring data collection to reduce knowledge gaps, test and improve predictions. We argue that implementing these six principles reduces uncertainties, improves the predictive capacity of the numerical water models, and ensures informed decision-making to support sustainable water resources management and thereby serve society better.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.024
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.045

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.024
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0070.017
Open science0.0030.009
Research integrity0.0040.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.034
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.243 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicWater resources management and optimizationFrench-language works237,207