MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7127075732 · doi:10.18280/ijsse.151116

Application of Numerical Models for Flood Risk in Arid Regions

2025· article· W7127075732 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Muneam G. Ali, Ammar H. Kamel

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Safety and Security Engineering · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFlood Risk Assessment and Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of Anbar
KeywordsAridFlood mythNumerical modelsNumerical modelingHydrology (agriculture)Flood prevention

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In recent decades, arid and semi-arid regions have witnessed a marked increase in the intensity and frequency of extreme hydrological events due to climate change, leading to unpredictable floods and flash floods with catastrophic consequences.This paper aims to analyze flood risks in rivers within these environments, focusing on the Euphrates River in Anbar Governorate, Iraq, as a case study to determine the optimal numerical model for studying this river, which is characterized by limited data and a lack of sufficient gauging stations.The research included an analysis of discharge and water level data in the river, a review and evaluation of software and models used in flood risk analysis, with a particular focus on the HEC-RAS software through comparison with other numerical and physical models.A systematic review of fifty published scientific studies was also conducted, along with an analysis of trends in the use of numerical and physical models, and the integration of numerical models with geographic information systems (GIS) and remote sensing.The results showed that integrating numerical models such as HEC-RAS with GIS and remote sensing techniques is an effective tool to compensate for the lack of data in arid and semi-arid regions, particularly in the Euphrates Basin in Iraq, and provides a solid scientific basis to support decision-making in flood risk management.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.230 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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 venueInternational Journal of Safety and Security EngineeringSame topicFlood Risk Assessment and ManagementFrench-language works237,207