MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387846443 · doi:10.1038/s41467-023-42411-2

Decline in Iran’s groundwater recharge

2023· article· en· W4387846443 on OpenAlexaff
Roohollah Noori, Mohsen Maghrebi, Søren Jessen, Sayed M. Bateni, Essam Heggy, Saman Javadi, Mojtaba Noury, Séverin Pistre, Soroush Abolfathi, Amir AghaKouchak

Bibliographic record

VenueNature Communications · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGroundwater and Isotope Geochemistry
Canadian institutionsUnited Nations University Institute for Water, Environment, and Health
FundersIran Water Resources Management Company
KeywordsGroundwater rechargeGroundwaterHydrology (agriculture)Water resource managementGeographyGeologyEnvironmental scienceAquiferGeotechnical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Groundwater recharge feeds aquifers supplying fresh-water to a population over 80 million in Iran-a global hotspot for groundwater depletion. Using an extended database comprising abstractions from over one million groundwater wells, springs, and qanats, from 2002 to 2017, here we show a significant decline of around -3.8 mm/yr in the nationwide groundwater recharge. This decline is primarily attributed to unsustainable water and environmental resources management, exacerbated by decadal changes in climatic conditions. However, it is important to note that the former's contribution outweighs the latter. Our results show the average annual amount of nationwide groundwater recharge (i.e., ~40 mm/yr) is more than the reported average annual runoff in Iran (i.e., ~32 mm/yr), suggesting the surface water is the main contributor to groundwater recharge. Such a decline in groundwater recharge could further exacerbate the already dire aquifer depletion situation in Iran, with devastating consequences for the country's natural environment and socio-economic development.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.031
Threshold uncertainty score0.061

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.245 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations171
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNature CommunicationsSame topicGroundwater and Isotope GeochemistryFrench-language works237,207