MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409527060 · doi:10.1029/2024ea003958

Harnessing the Power of Geophysical Imaging to Recharge California's Groundwater

2025· article· en· W4409527060 on OpenAlexaff
Seogi Kang, Meredith Goebel, R. Knight

Bibliographic record

VenueEarth and Space Science · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeophysical and Geoelectrical Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
FundersGordon and Betty Moore Foundation
KeywordsGroundwater rechargeGroundwaterGeologyGeophysicsHydrology (agriculture)AquiferGeotechnical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Motivated by the availability of 20,000 line‐km of airborne electromagnetic (AEM) data covering the Central Valley of California, we developed a workflow that uses resistivity profiles from electromagnetic (EM) data to assess the suitability of areas for groundwater recharge. We defined a suitable area as one where “fastpaths” of coarse‐grained material could efficiently move water from the ground surface to the water table. We defined recharge metrics and generated the corresponding maps by integrating resistivity profiles from AEM data, sediment type (from driller's logs), water level measurements, and water quality measurements. The workflow is publicly available through a web‐based application, fastpath ( https://fastpath.stanford.edu ). We produced maps displaying recharge metrics on a 400 m × 400 m grid covering the Central Valley, with 80% of the cells sufficiently close to an AEM resistivity profile (within ∼3 km) to be assessed for recharge. Various decisions are made in the workflow that result in a range of values for determined metrics at any given location. The maps summarizing all metrics show that between 19% (2,000,000 acres) and 56% (7,000,000 acres) of the total area in the valley is land suitable for recharge. The landcover with the largest total area of land classified as suitable is cultivated crops. We estimated the total space available for recharge water to be ∼170 km 3 which is two orders of magnitude greater than an estimate of the total volume of water likely to be available for recharge.

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.834
Threshold uncertainty score0.294

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.232 · 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 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

Citations3
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEarth and Space ScienceSame topicGeophysical and Geoelectrical MethodsFrench-language works237,207