Global Evaluation of the ISBA-TRIP Continental Hydrological System. Part II: Uncertainties in River Routing Simulation Related to Flow Velocity and Groundwater Storage
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In the companion paper to this one (Part I), the Interactions between Soil, Biosphere, and Atmosphere–Total Runoff Integrating Pathways (ISBA-TRIP) continental hydrological system of the Centre National de Recherches Météorologiques is evaluated by using river discharge measurements and terrestrial water storage (TWS) variations derived from three independent datasets of the Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment (GRACE). One of the conclusions is that the river reservoir simulated by TRIP at the global scale seems to be one of the main sources of TWS and/or discharge errors. Here, the authors study these uncertainties in river routing processes, such as flow velocity and groundwater storage. For this purpose, a simple groundwater reservoir depending on a time delay factor and a variable streamflow velocity calculated via Manning’s formula are added to TRIP following the approach of Arora and Boer. The previous and the new TRIP are then compared, and two studies of the sensitivity to the groundwater time delay factor and to the flow velocity are performed. Using the same experiment design as in Part I, the authors show that the effect of this flow velocity and of the groundwater time delay factor on the ISBA-TRIP simulation is potentially significant. Nevertheless, over tropical and temperate basins, a competition between the two processes implies a slight difference between the previous and the new TRIP compared to both the GRACE and the discharge signals. The global results underline that simulating a realistic streamflow velocity is a key process for global-scale application.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".