MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403377357 · doi:10.1038/s41597-024-03962-1

A practitioner-oriented regional hydrology data product for use in site-specific hydraulic applications

2024· article· en· W4403377357 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Kevin Shook, Zhihua He, John W. Pomeroy, Christopher Spence, Colin J. Whitfield

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Data · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrology and Watershed Management Studies
Canadian institutionsGlobal Institute for Water SecurityEnvironment and Climate Change CanadaUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersCanada First Research Excellence Fund
KeywordsHydrology (agriculture)Environmental scienceProduct (mathematics)GeologyMathematicsGeotechnical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the 465,000 km 2 Canadian Prairies ecozone, robust hydrological input data for hydraulic model applications are uncommon because of the sparse monitoring network and the intermittently connected stream network. New hydrological datasets can offer a valuable advancement for making water management decisions and designing infrastructure in this water stressed region. The Prairie Hydrology Design and Analysis Product (PHyDAP) was created to address existing limitations, and provides a comprehensive regional dataset for use in hydraulic modelling applications. PHyDAP is a collection of outputs from a physically based hydrological modelling framework, run for periods ranging from 38 to 150 years, according to three climate forcing datasets. The dataset includes vertical and lateral fluxes (rainfall, snowmelt, upland runoff, and open water evaporation) and basin streamflow, at hourly or 3-hourly intervals for the >4000 small basins of approximately 100 km 2 that span the region. This contribution describes the motivation for this work and methodology used to derive the data product, summarizes the data and its accessibility, and provides an overview of potential use cases.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.526
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.002

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 head0.089
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.215 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
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
Published2024
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific DataSame topicHydrology and Watershed Management StudiesFrench-language works237,207