MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415736232 · doi:10.14796/jwmm.c566

A Numerical Model for Predicting River Meandering in Alluvial Landscape

2025· article· W4415736232 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Sampa Paik, Gupinath Bhandari

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Water Management Modeling · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrology and Sediment Transport Processes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSinuosityFlood mythFlooding (psychology)Hydrology (agriculture)Digital elevation modelAlluviumRiver deltaRiver morphologyAlluvial fan

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Migration of rivers can tremendously impact both human lives and natural landscapes by supporting biodiversity, or by causing hazards such as flooding and landslides. This necessitates the development of reliable models that can predict such events and potentially help in flood risk management and land use planning over the long term. However, existing models often focus on isolated morphological indicators and lack quantitative validation using long-term remote sensing data. Furthermore, these models either focused on idealized or synthetic river geometries and never been applied or validated for rivers in Indian subcontinent. In this work, a numerical model is proposed to address the spatial and temporal evolution of migrating rivers in an alluvial landscape. The model integrates morphodynamic and hydrodynamic components to predict several important geomorphological features of a river such as centerline migration, change in river length, formation of neck cutoff zone, and sinuosity evolution across decadal timescales. The model is validated using the Landsat image data for two Indian rivers with different morphological behaviors: the Kosi River in northern India and the Manu River in the northeast. To the authors’ knowledge, this is the first comprehensive study that quantitively validates multidecadal river migration model against the satellite image data in the Indian subcontinent, addressing several gaps (both methodological and regional applicability) found in existing literature.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.626
Threshold uncertainty score0.882

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.220 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Water Management ModelingSame topicHydrology and Sediment Transport ProcessesFrench-language works237,207