MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1989681217 · doi:10.4296/cwrj3502173

Estimating Evaporation in a Prairie Landscape under Drought Conditions

2010· article· en· W1989681217 on OpenAlexfundvenueno aff
Robert Armstrong, John W. Pomeroy, Lawrence W. Martz

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Water Resources Journal / Revue canadienne des ressources hydriques · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicPlant Water Relations and Carbon Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCanadian Foundation for Climate and Atmospheric SciencesUniversity of Lethbridge
KeywordsEvapotranspirationEnvironmental scienceEnergy balanceInfiltration (HVAC)Water balanceHydrology (agriculture)Water contentMoistureAtmospheric sciencesSoil scienceMeteorologyGeographyEcologyGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract: Physically-based atmospheric models of evapotranspiration (ET) that consider the Penman combination energy balance and aerodynamic approach have achieved acceptance as useful tools for obtaining estimates of actual ET from land surfaces. These models have been made applicable to the case of non-saturated conditions through either surface resistance formulations (e.g., Penman-Monteith) or by application of the complementary evaporation theory of feedback between the atmosphere and surface moisture states (e.g., Granger-Gray). Their application becomes complicated under conditions of drought, when extremely low soil moisture availability severely restricts ET from the soil and plants. Under such severe conditions, consideration for the surface water balance and interactions with the balance of available energy and aerodynamic principles are important for accurately estimating actual ET. A modelling application is demonstrated using the Cold Regions Hydrological Model (CRHM) platform to examine the estimation of ET under drought conditions. CRHM allows users to assemble hydrological models by linking a suite of modular physically-based algorithms that describe the individual processes. In this case, the models assembled consider infiltration, evaporation, and soil moisture

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.822
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.199
Teacher spread0.192 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
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 venueCanadian Water Resources Journal / Revue canadienne des ressources hydriquesSame topicPlant Water Relations and Carbon DynamicsFrench-language works237,207