MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412439727 · doi:10.1016/j.ejrh.2025.102604

Time-scale effects on runoff simulation and parameters sensitivity using SWAT model

2025· article· en· W4412439727 on OpenAlexaff
Liqun Yu, Xingwei Chen, Weifang Ruan, Huaxia Yao, Haijun Deng, Ying Chen, Meibing Liu

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Hydrology Regional Studies · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrology and Watershed Management Studies
Canadian institutionsNipissing University
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsSWAT modelSurface runoffSensitivity (control systems)Scale (ratio)Environmental scienceGeographyComputer scienceCartographyEngineeringEcologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Study region Jianxi Watershed (JXW) and Shanmei Reservoir Watershed (SRW), located in southeastern coastal China. Study focus The SWAT model is a widely used hydrological simulation tool. However, the impact of different model development methods and the variation of sensitive parameters across time scales on simulation performance remains insufficiently studied. This study focused on the effects of time-scale on SWAT model runoff simulation performance by applying independent and unified development methods for model setup. Runoff simulations were conducted at annual, monthly, and daily time scales. The simulation performance differences between the two methods were compared, variations in sensitive parameters across time scales were analyzed, and their underlying mechanisms were explored to optimize SWAT model development and improve simulation reliability. New hydrological insights for the region (1) The simulation results of the SWAT model with the independent development method were all better than that of the unified development method. (2) The sensitive parameters of the models at the annual, monthly, and daily time scales exhibited significant differences. There were just 4 common parameters across the different time scales for the 2 regions, which were the surface runoff parameter CN2, the groundwater-related parameters ALPHA_BF and RCHRG_DP, and the evapotranspiration-related parameter ESCO. (3) The values of the four common sensitive parameters were varied with the time-scale, which was a key factor contributing to the superior simulation performance of the independent development method over the unified method.

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)0.000
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 score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score0.443

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.264 · 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

Citations6
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Hydrology Regional StudiesSame topicHydrology and Watershed Management StudiesFrench-language works237,207