Linking spatial patterns of perched groundwater storage and stormflow generation processes in a headwater forested catchment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This study examined hydropedological patterns and storage–discharge relationships towards catchment process understanding at a small forested site, the Hermine (Laurentians, Quebec, Canada). The catchment is characterized by a steep surface topography and a shallow, irregular, low‐permeability soil layer (LPSL), thus offering two possible main hydrologic drivers for runoff generation and routing. Using spatially detailed topographic data of the soil surface and the LPSL, water table levels measured at 94 locations on 50 occasions were expressed as 5 perched groundwater (PGW) storage variables: (i) a binary index illustrating the presence/absence of surface water, (ii) a soil saturation deficit, (iii) a water table elevation above the LPSL, (iv) a classification of sites as being in a dry, filling or spilling subsurface depression, and (v) a water table elevation above an underlying filled subsurface depression. The most common proxies for PGW storage, namely the saturation deficit and the location of surface saturated areas, were least appropriate to portray the Hermine catchment dynamics. Patterns of PGW storage were initially important during a rainstorm to trigger a response at the outlet but then remained unchanged even though streamflows continued to increase up to a higher order of magnitude. Hydraulically limited water tables were shown to exist in some areas, thus hinting towards the coexistence of rapid lateral preferential flow and slower subsurface flow. Most importantly, discontinuous storage–discharge relationships at the point‐scale combined into continuous relationships at the catchment‐scale, a result which can be seen as an emergent property of the Hermine catchment. Copyright © 2011 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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".