MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409770337 · doi:10.1080/02626667.2025.2496281

Deep learning reveals the relationship between vegetation and runoff in the Weihe River Basin on the Loess Plateau

2025· article· en· W4409770337 on OpenAlexaff
Qin Ju, Wenjie Zhao, Tongqing Shen, Junliang Jin, Hui Lin, Xiaoni Liu, Peng Jiang, Jianhui Wei, YU Zhong-bo

Bibliographic record

VenueHydrological Sciences Journal · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrology and Watershed Management Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia, Okanagan CampusUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNational Key Research and Development Program of ChinaNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsLoess plateauLoessVegetation (pathology)Surface runoffGeologyPlateau (mathematics)Structural basinHydrology (agriculture)Drainage basinPhysical geographyGeomorphologySoil scienceGeographyGeotechnical engineeringEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Weihe River Basin, a typical watershed in the Loess Plateau, is used as the research object to examine the regulation of runoff by vegetation. Here, we employed two deep learning algorithms, FNN and LSTM, for runoff modelling and adopted two modelling schemes—one incorporating NDVI and the other excluding NDVI—to examine the role of vegetation in runoff simulation. Finally, the optimal algorithm and the most appropriate modelling scheme were applied to simulate runoff variations under different scenarios. The results showed that the overall trend of NDVI in the Weihe River basin is increasing, and the overall trend of runoff is decreasing. Incorporating NDVI into the models will significantly improve the simulation accuracy. We also found that intra-annual vegetation cover variations impact runoff processes, with wet and normal year runoff highly sensitive to these changes. Our study highlights the role of vegetation in regulating runoff.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.083
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.276
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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHydrological Sciences JournalSame topicHydrology and Watershed Management StudiesFrench-language works237,207