MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1556908365 · doi:10.5194/gmd-8-1729-2015

A large-scale simulation model to assess karstic groundwater recharge over Europe and the Mediterranean

2015· article· en· W1556908365 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueGeoscientific model development · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrology and Watershed Management Studies
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersDeutscher Akademischer AustauschdienstNatural Environment Research CouncilSight Research UK
KeywordsGroundwater rechargeKarstHydrology (agriculture)EvapotranspirationDepression-focused rechargeEnvironmental scienceGroundwaterSurface runoffMediterranean climatePrecipitationAquiferGeologyGeographyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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.

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)0.002
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 score0.459
Threshold uncertainty score0.585

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.067
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.203 · 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