MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405355724 · doi:10.1016/j.isci.2024.111598

Assessing river discharge dynamics through relative surface water extent changes in river basins

2024· article· en· W4405355724 on OpenAlexaff
Feng Mao, Margaret Shanafield, Valérie Ouellet, David M. Hannah, Stefan Krause

Bibliographic record

VenueiScience · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFlood Risk Assessment and Management
Canadian institutionsHuntsman Marine Science Centre
FundersH2020 Marie Skłodowska-Curie ActionsHorizon 2020 Framework ProgrammeCardiff UniversityEuropean Commission
KeywordsSurface waterEnvironmental scienceHydrology (agriculture)Drainage basinGeologyGeographyEnvironmental engineeringGeotechnical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Surface water in rivers is vital for human society. However, our current understanding of the dynamics and drivers of river flows relies predominantly on stream gauging data, which are limited in spatial coverage and involve significant costs. Remote sensing techniques have emerged as complementary tools for monitoring river discharge, but these satellite-based methods often require complex data processing. This paper introduces a simple, yet effective and robust methodology to understand river discharge, using Australian rivers as a case study. Our findings reveal that changes in relative surface water extent within river basins can effectively capture river discharge dynamics. Moreover, we observe a linear relationship between relative surface water extent and river discharge in hilly basins and a quadratic relationship in flat basins. The new approach helps monitor river flows in ungauged river basins, and it has the potential to bridge the gap between local and regional understandings of water dynamics.

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.411
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.264 · 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 designObservational
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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueiScienceSame topicFlood Risk Assessment and ManagementFrench-language works237,207