Analysis of the Propagation Characteristics of Meteorological Drought to Hydrological Drought and Their Joint Effects on Low-Flow Drought Variability in the Oum Er Rbia Watershed, Morocco
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Analysis of the temporal relationship between meteorological drought and hydrological drought is crucial in monitoring water resource availability. This study examined the linear and lagged relationships of the spread of meteorological drought to hydrological drought and their joint effects on low-flow drought variability in the Oum Er-Rbia (OER) watershed. To this end, random forest (RF) model and statistical methods were used to study the characteristics of the temporal relationships between meteorological and hydrological drought indices at monthly, seasonal, and annual scales. The various analyses revealed that the relationship between hydrological and meteorological drought is mainly a function of the time scale considered, the choice of indices to describe each type of drought and the season considered. The hydrological drought of surface water and snow cover is synchronized with the meteorological drought at the monthly, seasonal, and annual scales. In contrast, the transition from meteorological drought to groundwater drought has a lag time of 1 month and is statistically significant up to t − 5 and t + 5, i.e., 6 months. The linear correlation between the annual rainfall deficit and the monthly groundwater storage index was the lowest (0.15) in December and the highest (0.83) in March. This suggests a seasonal response of groundwater drought to the cumulative effects of precipitation deficits. The RF analysis highlighted the importance of the cumulative characteristics of meteorological drought regarding the severity of low-flow drought. The meteorological drought indices at longer time scales have a greater impact on the severity of low-flow drought, with a contribution of approximately 10% per index. However, the relative contributions of meteorological factors and hydrological indices rarely exceed 5%. Thus, by exploring for the first time the complex interactions among the severity of low-flow regimes, meteorological and hydrological drought indices and meteorological factors, this study provides a new perspective for understanding the characteristics of propagation from meteorological to severe hydrological drought.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".