Surface network and drainage network: towards a common data structure
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The surface network is an application of the Morse-Smale complex to digital terrain models connecting ridges and thalwegs of the terrain in a planar, undirected graph. Although it provides a topological structure embedding critical elements of the terrain, its application to morphological analysis and hydrology remains limited mainly because the drainage network is the most relevant structure for analysis and it cannot be derived from the surface network. The drainage network is a directed, hierarchical graph formed by streams. Ridges of the surface network are not equivalent to drainage divides, which are not contained in the drainage network, and there is no direct association between thalwegs and streams. Therefore, this paper proposes to extend the surface network into a new structure that also embeds the drainage network. This is done by (1) revising the definition of ridges so that they include drainage divides and (2) assigning a flow direction to each thalweg, taking into account spurious depressions to avoid flow interruption. We show that this extended surface network can be used to compute the flow accumulation and different hydrographic features such as drainage basins and the Strahler order. The drainage network extracted from the extended surface network is compared to drainage networks computed with the traditional D8 approach in three case studies. Differences remain minor and are mainly due to the elevation inaccuracy in flat or slightly convex areas. Hence, the extended surface network provides a richer data structure allowing the use of a common topological data structure in both terrain analysis and hydrology.
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 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".