MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2078493400 · doi:10.1175/jhm627.1

Evaluation of the Hydrological Cycle over the Mississippi River Basin as Simulated by the Canadian Regional Climate Model (CRCM)

2007· article· en· W2078493400 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Hydrometeorology · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicClimate variability and models
Canadian institutionsOuranosUniversité du Québec à Montréal
FundersCanadian Foundation for Climate and Atmospheric SciencesU.S. Department of Energy
KeywordsEvapotranspirationWater cycleEnvironmental sciencePrecipitationClimate modelSurface runoffAnnual cycleClimatologyDrainage basinClimate changeStructural basinHydrology (agriculture)MeteorologyGeologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The water cycle over a given region is governed by many complex multiscale interactions and feedbacks, and their representation in climate models can vary in complexity. To understand which of the key processes require better representation, evaluation and validation of all components of the simulated water cycle are required. Adequate assessing of the simulated hydrological cycle over a given region is not trivial because observations for various water cycle components are seldom available at the regional scale. In this paper, a comprehensive validation method of the water budget components over a river basin is presented. In addition, the sensitivity of the hydrological cycle in the Canadian Regional Climate Model (CRCM) to a more realistic representation of the land surface processes, as well as radiation, cloud cover, and atmospheric boundary layer mixing is investigated. The changes to the physical parameterizations are assessed by evaluating the CRCM hydrological cycle over the Mississippi River basin. The first part of the evaluation looks at the basin annual means. The second part consists of the analysis and validation of the annual cycle of all water budget components. Finally, the third part is directed toward the spatial distribution of the annual mean precipitation, evapotranspiration, and runoff. Results indicate a strong response of the CRCM evapotranspiration and precipitation biases to the physical parameterization changes. Noticeable improvement was obtained in the simulated annual cycles of precipitation, evapotranspiration, moisture flux convergence, and terrestrial water storage tendency when more sophisticated physical parameterizations were used. Some improvements are also observed for the simulated spatial distribution of precipitation and evapotranspiration. The simulated runoff is less sensitive to changes in the CRCM physical parameterizations.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.135
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.033
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.253 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it