Atmospheric and Terrestrial Water Balances of Labrador's Churchill River Basin, as Simulated by the North American Regional Climate Change Assessment Program
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In an effort to understand the sources of uncertainty and the physical consistency of climate models from the North American Regional Climate Change Assessment Program (NARCCAP), an ensemble of general circulation models (GCMs) and regional climate models (RCMs) was used to explore climatological water balances for the Churchill River basin in Labrador, Canada. This study quantifies mean atmospheric and terrestrial water balance residuals, as well as their annual cycles. Mean annual atmospheric water balances had consistently higher residuals than the terrestrial water balances due, in part, to the influences of sampling of instantaneous variables and the interpolation of atmospheric data to published pressure levels. Atmospheric and terrestrial water balance residuals for each ensemble member were found to be consistent between base and future periods, implying that they are systemic and not climate dependent. With regard to the annual cycle, no pattern was found across time periods or ensemble members to indicate whether the monthly terrestrial or atmospheric root mean square residual was highest. Because of the interdependence of hydrological cycle components, the complexity of climate models and the variety of methods and processes used by different ensemble members, it was impossible to isolate all causes of the water balance residuals. That being said, the residuals created by interpolating a model's native vertical resolution onto NARCCAP's published pressure levels and the subsequent vertical interpolation were quantified and several other sources were explored. In general, residuals were found to be predominantly functions of the RCM choice (as opposed to the GCM choice) and their respective modelling processes, parameterization schemes, and post-processing.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".