MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388045602 · doi:10.1002/ldr.4915

Developing <scp>SWAT‐S</scp> to strengthen the soil erosion forecasting performance of the <scp>SWAT</scp> model

2023· article· en· W4388045602 on OpenAlex
Shaobo Long, Jianen Gao, Hui Shao, Lu Wang, XingChen Zhang, Zhe Gao

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueLand Degradation and Development · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicSoil erosion and sediment transport
Canadian institutionsEsri (Canada)
FundersNational Key Research and Development Program of ChinaChinese Academy of SciencesNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsSWAT modelSoil and Water Assessment ToolEnvironmental scienceSedimentErosionHydrology (agriculture)WatershedDrainage basinSoil scienceStructural basinGeologyStreamflowGeomorphologyGeographyGeotechnical engineeringComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Soil erosion is an important cause of global land degradation, and accurate monitoring of it is essential. The Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT), a distributed hydrological model, is an advanced technique for predicting soil erosion at watershed scale. However, as the erosion framework was established in gently sloping land, SWAT is limited in predicting soil erosion in some highland and mountainous regions. Therefore, this study suggested a method to integrate the sediment transport theoretical formula that can reflect the morphology of gully regions into SWAT to obtain SWAT‐S to enhance the calculation performance of sediment load, and the SWAT‐S was evaluated according to the coefficient of determination ( R 2 ), Nash‐Sutcliffe coefficient (NSE), Percent‐Bias (P‐BIAS) and root mean square errors (RMSE)‐observations SD ratio (RSR) in the Yanhe basin on the Chinese Loess Plateau. The results showed that SWAT‐S is more successful in reproducing the monthly sediment load, with R 2 , NSE, |P‐BIAS| and RSR were changed by 5.08%, 17.65%, −2.92% and −10.00% in the calibration, as well as by 1.18%, 10.39%, 45.45% and −18.75% in the validation of the SWAT‐S compared to SWAT. Meanwhile, SWAT‐S estimates 2.66 × 10 6 t more sediment than SWAT during the June–September flood season and better matches observed data. In total, the revised SWAT can improve the performance of sediment estimation, which is beneficial for the wider application of the model in more regions of the world.

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.

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.187
Threshold uncertainty score0.478

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.074
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.150 · 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