MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406220508 · doi:10.14796/jwmm.c535

Development of Appropriate Synthetic Design Storms for Small Catchments in Gauteng, South Africa

2025· article· en· W4406220508 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Johann Mouton, Ione Loots, J. Smithers

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Water Management Modeling · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrology and Watershed Management Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersWater Research Commission
KeywordsStormEnvironmental scienceMeteorologyIntensity (physics)Surface runoffEvent (particle physics)ClimatologyGeologyGeographyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Synthetic design storms are often used as input in dynamic rainfall-runoff simulation models. A number of methods to generate synthetic design storms are described in the literature. However, the selection of an inappropriate synthetic design storm will generate unrealistic simulations. Therefore, the aim of this study was to develop appropriate synthetic design storms for small urban catchments in Gauteng, South Africa. This study evaluated the applicability of the SCS method adapted for South Africa (SCS-SA), the Chicago Design Storm method and the Rectangular Hyetograph method. The performance of each method was evaluated compared to observed rainstorm events. Storm shape and intensity were used for the evaluation. As expected, the Rectangular Hyetograph was the least representative of naturally occurring storm events. The Chicago Design Storm and SCS-SA distribution curves initially performed poorly. Adjustment of the timing of the peak storm intensity to the start of the event resulted in a significant improvement for both methods. A novel approach was used to generate intermediate site-specific SCS-SA rainfall distribution curves anywhere in the study area.

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 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.552
Threshold uncertainty score0.433

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.194 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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