Characterization of Storm Flow Dynamics of Headwater Streams in the South Carolina Lower Coastal Plain<sup>1</sup>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Epps, Thomas H., Daniel R. Hitchcock, Anand D. Jayakaran, Drake R. Loflin, Thomas M. Williams, and Devendra M. Amatya, 2012. Characterization of Storm Flow Dynamics of Headwater Streams in the South Carolina Lower Coastal Plain. Journal of the American Water Resources Association (JAWRA) 1‐14. DOI: 10.1111/jawr.12000 Abstract: Hydrologic monitoring was conducted in two first‐order lower coastal plain watersheds in South Carolina, United States, a region with increasing growth and land use change. Storm events over a three‐year period were analyzed for direct runoff coefficients (ROC) and the total storm response (TSR) as percent rainfall. ROC calculations utilized an empirical hydrograph separation method that partitioned total streamflow into sustained base flow and direct runoff components. ROC ratios ranged from 0 to 0.32 on the Upper Debidue Creek (UDC) watershed and 0 to 0.57 on Watershed 80 (WS80); TSR results ranged from 0 to 0.93 at UDC and 0.01 to 0.74 at WS80. Variability in event runoff generation was attributed to seasonal trends in water table elevation fluctuation as regulated by evapotranspiration. Groundwater elevation breakpoints for each watershed were identified based on antecedent water table elevation, streamflow, ROCs, and TSRs. These thresholds represent the groundwater elevation above which event runoff generation increased sharply in response to rainfall. For effective coastal land use decision making, baseline watershed hydrology must be understood to serve as a benchmark for management goals, based on both seasonal and event‐based surface and groundwater interactions.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".