MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404192207 · doi:10.1080/02626667.2024.2427890

The first catchment water balance: new insights into Pierre Perrault, his perceptual model and his peculiar catchment

2024· article· en· W4404192207 on OpenAlexaff
Jeffrey J. McDonnell, Keith Beven, Uwe Morgenstern, Laurent Pfister

Bibliographic record

VenueHydrological Sciences Journal · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrology and Watershed Management Studies
Canadian institutionsGlobal Institute for Water SecurityUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersMinistry of Business, Innovation and Employment
KeywordsDrainage basinContext (archaeology)PerceptionWater balanceStreamflowHydrology (agriculture)Environmental scienceGeographyArchaeologyGeologyCartographyEpistemology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Pierre Perrault and his 1674 book De l’Origine des Fontaines are widely acknowledged in hydrology as the first formal articulation of the catchment water balance based on field data. Many summaries of his work have now been written, but few of these summaries have examined Perrault’s perceptual model in detail and none that we are aware of have gone back to his study catchment to collect new data in which to frame these historic findings in a modern context. Here we report new insights (with re-calculations of some of his analyses) into Perrault’s work, his perceptual model of streamflow generation and his rather peculiar 119 km2 headwater catchment of the Seine River basin. We show the uncertainty of his flow and catchment area estimates, some errors in perception about hydrological flowpaths and new age estimates for the spring-fed site where he worked. Despite these modern criticisms and updates, Perrault’s place in hydrological history is secure: he was the first to bring quantitative analysis to fundamental questions of the terrestrial water cycle.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.017
Scholarly communication0.0070.013
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.228 · 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 designQualitative
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 venueHydrological Sciences JournalSame topicHydrology and Watershed Management StudiesFrench-language works237,207