MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4361000981 · doi:10.1029/2021wr031614

A Framework for Estimating Global River Discharge From the Surface Water and Ocean Topography Satellite Mission

2023· article· en· W4361000981 on OpenAlexaff
Michael Durand, Colin J. Gleason, Tamlin M. Pavelsky, Renato Prata de Moraes Frasson, M. Turmon, Cédric H. David, Elizabeth H. Altenau, Nikki Tebaldi, Kévin Larnier, Jérôme Monnier, Pierre‐Olivier Malaterre, Hind Oubanas, George H. Allen, Brian Astifan, Craig Brinkerhoff, Paul Bates, David M. Bjerklie, Stephen Coss, Robert W. Dudley, Luciana Fenoglio-Marc, Pierre‐André Garambois, Augusto Getirana, Peirong Lin, S. A. Margulis, Pascal Matte, J. Toby Minear, Aggrey Muhebwa, Ming Pan, Daniel L. Peters, Ryan Riggs, Md. Safat Sikder, Travis Simmons, C. M. Stuurman, Jay Taneja, Angelica Tarpanelli, Kerstin Schulze, Mohammad J. Tourian, Jida Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueWater Resources Research · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFlood Risk Assessment and Management
Canadian institutionsEnvironment and Climate Change Canada
FundersSight Research UKEarth Sciences DivisionJet Propulsion LaboratoryNatural Environment Research CouncilCentre National d’Etudes SpatialesRoyal Society
KeywordsSWOT analysisDischargeEnvironmental scienceSatelliteHydrology (agriculture)Ocean surface topographyElevation (ballistics)StreamflowSurface waterMeteorologyDrainage basinClimatologyGeologyGeographyMathematicsCartographyEnvironmental engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The Surface Water and Ocean Topography (SWOT) mission will vastly expand measurements of global rivers, providing critical new data sets for both gaged and ungaged basins. SWOT discharge products (available approximately 1 year after launch) will provide discharge for all river that reaches wider than 100 m. In this paper, we describe how SWOT discharge produced and archived by the US and French space agencies will be computed from measurements of river water surface elevation, width, and slope and ancillary data, along with expected discharge accuracy. We present for the first time a complete estimate of the SWOT discharge uncertainty budget, with separate terms for random (standard error) and systematic (bias) uncertainty components in river discharge time series. We expect that discharge uncertainty will be less than 30% for two‐thirds of global reaches and will be dominated by bias. Separate river discharge estimates will combine both SWOT and in situ data; these “gage‐constrained” discharge estimates can be expected to have lower systematic uncertainty. Temporal variations in river discharge time series will be dominated by random error and are expected to be estimated within 15% for nearly all reaches, allowing accurate inference of event flow dynamics globally, including in ungaged basins. We believe this level of accuracy lays the groundwork for SWOT to enable breakthroughs in global hydrologic science.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.048
Threshold uncertainty score0.096

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.342
Teacher spread0.300 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations132
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWater Resources ResearchSame topicFlood Risk Assessment and ManagementFrench-language works237,207