MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407160473 · doi:10.31223/x5xb07

A review of open data for studying global groundwater in social-ecological systems

2025· review· en· W4407160473 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrology and Watershed Management Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCanadian Space AgencyNational Science and Technology CouncilBundesministerium für Bildung und ForschungStrategic Research CouncilCanadian Institute for Advanced ResearchNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCentrum för naturkatastrofslära, Uppsala UniversitetEuropean CommissionAlexander von Humboldt-StiftungNational Science Foundation
KeywordsGroundwaterEnvironmental scienceEcologyGeographyEnvironmental resource managementWater resource managementGeologyBiologyGeotechnical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Global data have served an integral role in characterizing large-scale groundwater systems, identifying their sustainability challenges, and informing on socioeconomic and ecological dimensions of groundwater. These insights have revealed groundwater as a dynamic component of both the water cycle and social-ecological systems, leading to an expansion in groundwater science that increasingly focuses on interactions between groundwater with ecological, socioeconomic, and Earth systems. This shift presents many opportunities that are conditional on broader, more interdisciplinary system conceptualizations, models, and methods that require the integration of a greater diversity of data in contrast to conventional hydrogeological investigations. Here, we catalogue 144 global open access datasets and dataset collections relevant to groundwater science that span elements of the hydrosphere, biosphere, atmosphere, lithosphere, food systems, governance, management, and other socioeconomic system dimensions. The assembled catalogue offers a reference of existing data for use in interdisciplinary assessments, and we summarize these data across their primary system, spatial resolution, temporal range, data type, generation method, level of groundwater representation, and institutional location of lead authorship. The catalogue includes 15 groundwater datasets, 23 datasets explicitly linked with groundwater, and 106 datasets with implicit or potential groundwater connections. We find the majority of datasets are temporally static and that temporally dynamic data availability currently peaks during the 2000-2010 decade. Only a small fraction of temporally dynamic data are explicitly linked to groundwater, representing a significant opportunity for future work to address. We find that most groundwater datasets are generated by a small number of countries, including the USA, Germany, the Netherlands, and Canada. We raise three themes of possible priorities for future global groundwater data initiatives, which include: data improvements through more explicit integration of groundwater and prioritizing observed and temporally dynamic data; elevating regional and local scale data and perspectives to address challenges relating to equity and bias; and advancing and promoting data sharing initiatives founded on reciprocal benefits between global initiatives and data providers.

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.

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gemmaOpen science
Domain: not available · Genre: Review
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Not applicablemedium
gptno category
Domain: not available · Genre: Review
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Other designhigh
models splitAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

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 categoriesOpen science
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.655
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.010
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 head0.184
GPT teacher head0.419
Teacher spread0.236 · 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