Diagnosing a distributed hydrologic model for two high‐elevation forested catchments based on detailed stand‐ and basin‐scale data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study evaluates the performance and internal structure of the distributed hydrology soil vegetation model (DHSVM) using 1998–2001 data collected at Upper Penticton Creek, British Columbia, Canada. It is shown that clear‐cut snowmelt rates calculated using data‐derived snow albedo curves are in agreement with observed lysimeter outflow. Measurements in a forest stand with 50% air crown closure suggest that the fraction of shortwave radiation transmitted through the canopy is 0.18–0.28 while the hemispherical canopy view factor controlling longwave radiation fluxes to the forest snowpack is estimated at 0.81 ± 0.07. DHSVM overestimates shortwave transmittance (0.50) and underestimates the view factor (0.50). An alternative forest radiation balance is formulated that is consistent with the measurements. This new formulation improves model efficiency in simulating streamflow from 0.84 to 0.91 due to greater early season melt that results from the enhanced importance of longwave radiation below the canopy. The model captures differences in canopy rainfall interception between small and large storms, tree transpiration measured over a 6‐day summer period, and differences in soil moisture between a dry and a wet summer. While the model was calibrated to 1999 snow water equivalent (SWE) and hydrograph data for the untreated control basin, it successfully simulates forest and clear‐cut SWE and streamflow for the 3 other years and 4 years of preharvesting and postharvesting streamflow for the second basin. Comparison of model states with the large array of observations suggests that the modified model provides a reliable tool for assessing forest management impacts in the region.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".