A large-scale simulation model to assess karstic groundwater recharge over Europe and the Mediterranean
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. Karst develops through the dissolution of carbonate rock and is a major source of groundwater contributing up to half of the total drinking water supply in some European countries. Previous approaches to model future water availability in Europe are either too-small scale or do not incorporate karst processes, i.e. preferential flow paths. This study presents the first simulations of groundwater recharge in all karst regions in Europe with a parsimonious karst hydrology model. A novel parameter confinement strategy combines a priori information with recharge-related observations (actual evapotranspiration and soil moisture) at locations across Europe while explicitly identifying uncertainty in the model parameters. Europe's karst regions are divided into four typical karst landscapes (humid, mountain, Mediterranean and desert) by cluster analysis and recharge is simulated from 2002 to 2012 for each karst landscape. Mean annual recharge ranges from negligible in deserts to > 1 m a−1 in humid regions. The majority of recharge rates range from 20 to 50% of precipitation and are sensitive to subannual climate variability. Simulation results are consistent with independent observations of mean annual recharge and significantly better than other global hydrology models that do not consider karst processes (PCR-GLOBWB, WaterGAP). Global hydrology models systematically under-estimate karst recharge implying that they over-estimate actual evapotranspiration and surface runoff. Karst water budgets and thus information to support management decisions regarding drinking water supply and flood risk are significantly improved by our model.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".