MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1912647720 · doi:10.1029/2010gl044878

Changing spring air‐temperature gradients along large northern rivers: Implications for severity of river‐ice floods

2010· article· en· W1912647720 on OpenAlexafffund
Terry D. Prowse, Rajesh R. Shrestha, Barrie Bonsal, Yonas Dibike

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysical Research Letters · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicArctic and Antarctic ice dynamics
Canadian institutionsImpactUniversity of VictoriaEnvironment and Climate Change Canada
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsEnvironmental scienceSpring (device)Climate changeFlood mythArcticFlooding (psychology)Hydrology (agriculture)Current (fluid)ClimatologyPhysical geographyAir temperatureAtmospheric sciencesGeologyOceanographyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Concern exists about future changes to air‐temperature gradients along large “northward”‐flowing Arctic rivers having the potential to affect the timing and severity of spring river‐ice breakup, and associated flooding events. To evaluate the significance of this concern, an analysis was conducted of temporal and spatial changes to the spring 0°C air‐temperature isotherm (I0°C), which is also known to be a good index for the timing of spring melt/breakup conditions. Changes in I0°C were analyzed for the downstream 2000‐km main‐stem reaches of four large Arctic rivers: the Lena, Mackenzie, Ob and Yenisey. Current climatic conditions (1979–2008) were compared to those of two future climatic periods (2041–2070 and 2071–2100) projected by an ensemble of four Global Climate Models. Future projections show I0°C chronology patterns along the rivers that closely parallel current conditions, but with earlier dates varying from an ensemble mean of 7.5 (13.6) to 16.5 (25.5) days for the 2050s (2080s). Results also reveal a progressive downstream increase in warming under future climates. At the time when headwater temperatures reach 0°C, river mouth to headwater temperature differences for the four rivers decrease by an average of 0.8°C (2.4°C) to 2.1°C (3.7°C) for the 2050s (2080s). The implications of such decreases on the severity of spring ice‐jam floods are discussed.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.052

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.257 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations36
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeophysical Research LettersSame topicArctic and Antarctic ice dynamicsFrench-language works237,207