Understanding the performance of the FLake model over two African Great Lakes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. The ability of the one-dimensional lake model FLake to represent the mixolimnion temperatures for tropical conditions was tested for three locations in East Africa: Lake Kivu and Lake Tanganyika's northern and southern basins. Meteorological observations from surrounding automatic weather stations were corrected and used to drive FLake, whereas a comprehensive set of water temperature profiles served to evaluate the model at each site. Careful forcing data correction and model configuration made it possible to reproduce the observed mixed layer seasonality at Lake Kivu and Lake Tanganyika (northern and southern basins), with correct representation of both the mixed layer depth and water temperatures. At Lake Kivu, mixolimnion temperatures predicted by FLake were found to be sensitive both to minimal variations in the external parameters and to small changes in the meteorological driving data, in particular wind velocity. In each case, small modifications may lead to a regime switch, from the correctly represented seasonal mixed layer deepening to either completely mixed or permanently stratified conditions from ~ 10 m downwards. In contrast, model temperatures were found to be robust close to the surface, with acceptable predictions of near-surface water temperatures even when the seasonal mixing regime is not reproduced. FLake can thus be a suitable tool to parameterise tropical lake water surface temperatures within atmospheric prediction models. Finally, FLake was used to attribute the seasonal mixing cycle at Lake Kivu to variations in the near-surface meteorological conditions. It was found that the annual mixing down to 60 m during the main dry season is primarily due to enhanced lake evaporation and secondarily to the decreased incoming long wave radiation, both causing a significant heat loss from the lake surface and associated mixolimnion cooling.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".