MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389584691 · doi:10.14796/jwmm.c510

Modeling Optimal Canal Conveyance Capacity for the Ahero Irrigation Scheme using the Hydrologic Engineering Centre River Analysis System (HEC-RAS)

2023· article· en· W4389584691 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Justus W. Owino, Basil T. Iro Ong'or, Micah Mukolwe

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Water Management Modeling · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWater resources management and optimization
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMasinde Muliro University of Science and Technology
KeywordsIrrigationLevellingHydrology (agriculture)Environmental scienceIrrigation districtLow-flow irrigation systemsEngineeringGeotechnical engineeringDrip irrigationGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Irrigation plays a critical role in addressing food security as envisaged in Kenya’s development blueprint, the Big Four Agenda. However, the performance of any open channel irrigation system is a function of its canal conveyance efficiency, among other factors. To overcome challenges with irrigation water conveyance at the Ahero Irrigation Scheme, a Hydrologic Engineering Centre River Analysis System (HEC-RAS) model was used to simulate the flow characteristics at the tail-end section of the canal network, covering a total length of 2.6 km. The study also consisted of a comparative review of an FAO-CROPWAT model estimation water requirement for rice. The manual estimation of the canal capacity in its unmaintained state revealed a discharge capacity of 0.228 m3/s, which was significantly lower than the minimum crop water demand requirement estimation of 0.3166 m3/s (a 28% water deficit). The simulated characteristics projected an optimal flow capacity of 0.583 m3/s. The study recommends canal maintenance (levelling bed undulations, dredging, and smooth concrete lining) to attain the optimal flow capacity at the tail end of the network.

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 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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.547
Threshold uncertainty score0.565

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.201
Teacher spread0.173 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Water Management ModelingSame topicWater resources management and optimizationFrench-language works237,207