MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407040870 · doi:10.1080/15715124.2024.2440757

Evaluating and improving the simulation of channel and reservoir processes for streamflow and water quality modelling in the Lake Erie watersheds

2025· article· en· W4407040870 on OpenAlexaffabout
Amanpreet Kaur, Pranesh Kumar Paul, Ramesh Rudra, Pradeep Goel, Prasad Daggupati

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of River Basin Management · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrology and Watershed Management Studies
Canadian institutionsMinistry of the Environment, Conservation and ParksUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStreamflowEnvironmental scienceChannel (broadcasting)Hydrology (agriculture)Water qualityDam removalGeologySedimentEngineeringGeomorphologyDrainage basinGeographyGeotechnical engineeringEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To tackle the eutrophication of Lake Erie, USA and Canada agreed to reduce phosphorus levels by 40% by 2025. An accurate simulation of water quality and quantity is essential to achieve this goal. Various hydrological and water quality models have been applied in the Lake Erie Basin for this purpose. However, uncertainty in channel geometry parameters leads to uncertainty in sediment and nutrient loadings. Besides, the presence of reservoirs significantly affects the sediment and nutrient loads as they are transported through the streams. Thus, improving how these models calculate channel geometry parameters and reservoir processes can minimize the uncertainty and improve the estimation of these loads. So, this study tested the applicability of regional regression equations for in-stream and reservoir processes in the SWAT model which currently uses a single nationwide curve to derive channel geometry parameters, and a simplistic mass-balance approach to simulate sediment and nutrients in water bodies such as reservoirs. Their impact on water quantity and quality was investigated for two Canadian watersheds- Guelph and Pittock. Results showed that calibrating and validating the model at reservoir inlets and outlets, modifications to channel geometry parameters and sediment transport methods significantly improved predictions. The inclusion of reservoir routines enhanced the accuracy of streamflow simulations, while the modified Vollenweider equations outperformed SWAT in simulating reservoir nutrient loadings.

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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.228
Threshold uncertainty score0.142

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.289 · 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of River Basin ManagementSame topicHydrology and Watershed Management StudiesFrench-language works237,207