MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401804166 · doi:10.14796/jwmm.h522

Impact of land use and land cover changes on runoff generation in the Kidangoor watershed, Kerala

2024· article· en· W4401804166 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Abhijith Ajith, Dillip Kumar Barik

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Water Management Modeling · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrology and Watershed Management Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWatershedSurface runoffEnvironmental scienceLand coverLand useHydrology (agriculture)Cover (algebra)Water resource managementGeographyGeologyEcologyEngineeringComputer scienceBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this study, the impact of change in land use and land cover (LULC) on runoff estimation in the Kidangoor watershed was assessed using the SCS-CN technique. Recent flood-like natural disasters in Kerala are thought to be driven by changes in rainfall patterns and LULC. The accurate calculation of runoff from watersheds is urgently needed. In ArcGIS 10.5, the supervised classification approach is used to classify satellite images from 2000, 2011, 2013, and 2017. Similarly, the Inverse Distance Weighted (IDW) technique is used to produce spatial distribution maps of rainfall for each antecedent moisture condition (AMC). The runoff maps were generated by superimposing the distributed rainfall, LULC, and Hydrological Soil Group (HSG) maps. It was observed that the built-up area expanded by 168% between 2000 and 2017, whereas other classes decreased by 10–23%. However, compared to 2000, both with and without a change in LULC, runoff generation increased by just 31%, and 27% in 2017. The SCS-CN technique for runoff estimation indicates that the change in LULC in the Kidangoor watershed is insignificant. Thus, this study will help land use planners and decision-makers in limiting the potential damage from flooding when it comes to flood management techniques.

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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score0.211

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.221 · 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

Citations4
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Water Management ModelingSame topicHydrology and Watershed Management StudiesFrench-language works237,207