The Potential of Hydrogeodesy to Address Water-related Problems and Sustainability Challenges
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Increasing climatic and human pressures are changing the world's water resources and hydrological processes at unprecedented rates.These changes require monitoring water resources from ground and space at different temporal and spatial scales.This monitoring can be achieved with Hydrogeodesy, the science that measures the Earth's solid and aquatic surfaces, gravity field, and their changes over time.Hydrogeodesy encompasses geodetic technologies such as Altimetry, Interferometric Synthetic Aperture Radar (InSAR), Mass gravimetry, and Global Navigation Satellite Systems (GNSS).During the last thirty years, these technologies have contributed to quantifying changes in surface and groundwater resources locally, regionally, and globally.Yet, to our knowledge, the evolution and combination of these technologies and their role within current hydrological, sustainability science, and management frameworks remain unaddressed.Here, we first perform a meta-analysis of over 3,000 articles to understand the range, trends, and applications of hydrogeodetic technologies.Second, we discuss the potential of Hydrogeodesy to significantly advance hydrology, water-related sustainability, and water management.For this, we focus on the 23 Unsolved Questions of the International Association of Hydrological Sciences and the Planetary Boundaries framework (meant as guidance towards a safe operating space for humanity).We find a growing body of literature relating to the advancements in methods, accuracy, precision, and measurements of these technologies and support of hydrological modeling.Hydrogeodesy is also largely published in multidisciplinary and remote sensing journals, which points to considerable potential for integration with water-related sciences, especially regarding terrestrial water features such as wetlands, permafrost, lakes, and rivers.We call for a coordinated way forward for hydrogeodesists to increase interdisciplinary collaboration and broader and deeper application of Hydrogeodesy for understanding and managing water resources and to provide guidance for a safe operating space for humans regarding water resources.
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 | 0.009 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.010 | 0.014 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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".