MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4393609303 · doi:10.5281/zenodo.4584119

The Great Lakes Runoff Intercomparison Project Phase 3: Lake Erie (GRIP-E)

2021· dataset· en· W4393609303 on OpenAlexaff
Juliane Mai, Bryan A. Tolson, Hongren Shen, Étienne Gaborit, Vincent Fortin, Nicolas Gasset, Hervé Awoye, Tricia Stadnyk, Lauren M. Fry, Emily A. Bradley, Frank Seglenieks, André Guy Tranquille Temgoua, Daniel Princz, Shervan Gharari, Amin Haghnegahdar, Mohamed Elshamy, Martin Gauch, Jimmy Lin, Xiaojing Ni, Yongping Yuan, Meghan McLeod, N. B. Basu, Rohini Kumar, Oldřich Rakovec, Luis Samaniego, Sabine Attinger, Narayan Kumar Shrestha, Prasad Daggupati, Tirthankar Roy, Sungwook Wi, Timothy Hunter, James R. Craig, Alain Pietroniro

Bibliographic record

VenueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) · 2021
Typedataset
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrology and Watershed Management Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSurface runoffEnvironmental scienceHydrology (agriculture)GeologyGeotechnical engineeringEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Model inter-comparison studies help to evaluate the agility of models to simulate variables of interest such as streamflow, evaporation and soil moisture. The study presented here is the third in a sequence of Great Lakes Runoff Intercomparison Projects (GRIP). The densely populated Lake Erie watershed studied here (GRIP-E) is facing major environmental issues such as eutrophication caused by urban and agricultural runoff. Seventeen hydrologic and land-surface models of different complexity are setup over the same domain using the same meteorological forcings and are compared regarding streamflow at 46 calibration and seven independent validation stations. The results show that 1) the good performance of Machine Learning models during calibration decreases significantly in validation due to the limited amount of training data, 2) models calibrated at individual stations perform surprisingly well in validation, and 3) most distributed models calibrated over the entire domain have problems to simulate urban areas but outperform Machine Learning and locally calibrated models in validation. This is the project documentation of the Great Lakes Runoff Inter-comparison Project for Lake Erie GRIP-E funded under IMPC project of Global Water Futures program. Aim of the project The main scopes of the GRIP-E project are: Develop strategies to handle cross-border issues of available data and develop unifying approaches Test operational applicability of different models Identify respective strengths of models, i.e., learning which models perform best under certain conditions Generating multi-model ensembles to quantify uncertainty of model outputs We contacted some model users to get a better feeling of their needs and determine model end-use and thus inform participants about end-goals of model development. Models and Partners There are several models participating in the model inter comparison. The setup is made such that models can be added easily as long as they are setup with the below mentioned input data over the modelling domain. Details on the models can be found here. Objectives Model setups depend on the modelling objective. Not every model is appropriate for every objective. We therefore have defined several objectives the partners can choose from. Models with the same objective will be compared at the end. The objectives can be found here. Datasets The modelling domain is set as specified by the Great Lakes Aquatic Habitat Framework (GLAHF). The intention of the GRIP-E project is to setup the models with as many common datasets as possible. Shared inputs and setups between the models are the digital elevation model (DEM), the soil data and the land use data. Details can be found here. Results The results of the individual models in different phases and objectives are presented. Details can be found here. Citation Journal Publication Mai, J. , B. A. Tolson, H. Shen, É. Gaborit, V. Fortin, N. Gasset, H. Awoye, T. A. Stadnyk, L. M. Fry, E. A. Bradley, F. Seglenieks, A. G. Temgoua, D. G. Princz, S. Gharari, A. Haghnegahdar, M. E. Elshamy, S. Razavi, M. Gauch, J. Lin, X. Ni, Y. Yuan, M. McLeod, N. B. Basu, R. Kumar, O. Rakovec, L. Samaniego, S. Attinger, N. K. Shrestha, P. Daggupati, T. Roy, S. Wi, T. Hunter, J. R. Craig, and A. Pietroniro (2021). The Great Lakes Runoff Intercomparison Project Phase 3: Lake Erie (GRIP-E) Journal of Hydrologic Engineering. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)HE.1943-5584.0002097 Code and Data Publication Code and data that can be found in this GitHub are published in this Zenodo dataset. Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4301003 Gridded model outputs of mHM-UFZ are published under: Rakovec, O., Kumar, R., McLeod, M., Mai, J., and Samaniego, L. (2020). mHM_UFZ gridded simulations for the Great Lakes Runoff Inter-comparison Project for Lake Erie Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3886551 Gridded model outputs of GEM-Hydro are published under: Gaborit, É., Princz, D.G., Fortin, V., Durnford, D., Mai, J. (2020). GEM-Hydro gridded simulations for the Great Lakes Runoff Inter-comparison Project for Lake Erie (GRIP-E) Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3890487 Basin outlines and shapefiles are published under: Shen, H., Mai, J., Tolson, B. A., and Han, M. (2020). Watershed shapes for the Great Lakes Runoff Inter-comparison Project for Lake Erie (GRIP-E) Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3888690

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.044
Threshold uncertainty score0.088

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.034
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.238 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreDataset

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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)→Same topicHydrology and Watershed Management Studies→French-language works237,207→