Significance of ice‐induced storage to spring runoff: a case study of the Mackenzie River
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract For most ice‐covered rivers at northern latitudes, the spring freshet is often the largest hydrologic event of the year. Based on a case study of the Mackenzie River, water released from hydraulic storage due to flow abstraction during the early winter is shown to be a major component of the flow volume that comprises the following spring freshet. The amount of water placed into hydraulic and ice‐growth storage over a 60‐day period was calculated to be equal to 27% of the flow that would normally have occurred during this period if an ice cover had not formed. The amount of water released from this ice‐induced hydraulic storage at the time of break‐up and the concomitant spring snowmelt peak accounted for 15 to 19% of the spring freshet volume, depending on the temporal definition of the ‘release’ period. The ice‐related contribution increases to as much as 25% of freshet volume if the ice growth during the fall depression is also included. Importantly, even this percentage is considered an underestimate since it does not take into account the flow contribution from the melt of the complete winter ice cover. If the ice‐induced storage volume is not accounted for in the spring hydrograph, then the volumes of water from spring snowmelt and/or rainfall would be significantly overestimated. Copyright © 2002 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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".