Temporal trends in δ<sup>18</sup>O composition of precipitation in Germany: insights from time series modelling and trend analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Temporal and spatial variations of stable oxygen ( 18 O) and hydrogen ( 2 H) isotope measurements in precipitation act as important proxies for changing hydro‐meteorological and regional and global climate patterns. Temporal trends in time series of the stable isotope composition in precipitation were rarely observed, and they are poorly understood. These might be a result of a lack of proper trend detection tools and effort for exploring trend processes. Here, we investigate temporal trends of δ 18 O in precipitation at 17 observation stations in Germany between 1978 and 2009. We test if significant trends in the isotope time series from different models can be observed. Mann–Kendall trend tests are applied on the isotope series, using general multiplicative seasonal autoregressive integrate moving average (ARIMA) models, which account for first and higher order serial correlations. Effects of temperature, precipitation, and geographic parameters on isotope trends are also investigated in the proposed models. To benchmark our proposed approach, the ARIMA results are compared with a trend‐free pre‐whitening procedure, the state of the art method for removing the first order autocorrelation in environmental trend studies. Moreover, we further explore whether higher order serial correlations in isotope series affects our trend results. Overall, three out of the 17 stations show significant changes when higher order autocorrelation are adjusted, and four show a significant trend when temperature and precipitation effects are considered. The significant trends in the isotope time series generally occur only at low elevation stations. Higher order autoregressive processes are shown to be important in the isotope time series analysis. Results suggest that the widely used trend analysis with only the first order autocorrelation adjustment may not adequately take account of the high order autocorrelated processes in the stable isotope series. The investigated time series analysis method including higher autocorrelation and external climate variable adjustments is shown to be a better alternative. Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
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) | 0.000 | 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".