Spatial Scale‐Dependence of Preferred Flow Domains during Infiltration in a Layered Field Soil
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Preferential flow at the Darcian scale may manifest as a consistent spatial pattern of high‐ and low‐flow domains. The degree of persistence of these high‐ and low‐flow domains with depth has important implications for the prediction of subsurface contaminant transport and the development of mitigation strategies to reduce pollution of sensitive environmental receptors. The objective of this study was to quantify the scale‐dependent influence of a soil horizon interface on the vertical continuity of preferred flow domains. Spatial patterns of A and B horizon transient stream tube soil water flux were measured with vertical time domain reflectometry probes in a field soil under four different quasi‐steady surface water application rates. The scale‐dependent vertical continuity of stream tube soil water flux across the A–B horizon interface was quantified with Fourier‐domain coherency spectra. Comparison of the A and B horizon fluxes across and within different water application rates revealed a loss of coherency between A and B horizon water flux with increasing flow rate between spatial scales of 1.0 to 6.75 and 0.38 to 0.50 m. The flux‐ and scale‐dependent behavior of the horizon interface is probably the outcome of: (i) convergence of the pattern of preferred flow domains in the A horizon to the spatial pattern of the saturated hydraulic conductivity of the A horizon with increasing water application rate; and (ii) increased modification of the A horizon soil water flux pattern as the wetting front moves across the soil horizon interface. The results of this study indicate that the pedon, like the representative elementary volume, is hydrologically significant.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".