Geomorphic controls on hyporheic exchange flow in mountain streams
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Hyporheic exchange flows were simulated using MODFLOW and MODPATH to estimate relative effects of channel morphologic features on the extent of the hyporheic zone, on hyporheic exchange flow, and on the residence time of stream water in the hyporheic zone. Four stream reaches were compared in order to examine the influence of stream size and channel constraint. Within stream reaches, the influence of pool‐step or pool‐riffle sequences, channel sinuosity, secondary channels, and channel splits was examined. Results showed that the way in which channel morphology controlled exchange flows differed with stream size and, in some cases, with channel constraint. Pool‐step sequences drove hyporheic exchange in the second‐order sites, creating exchange flows with relatively short residence times. Multiple features interacted to drive hyporheic exchange flow in the unconstrained fifth‐order site, where pool‐riffle sequences and a channel split created exchange flows with short residence times, whereas a secondary channel created exchange flows with long residence times. There was relatively little exchange flow in the bedrock‐constrained fifth‐order site. Groundwater flow models were effective in examining the morphologic features that controlled hyporheic exchange flow, and surface‐visible channel morphologic features controlled the development of the hyporheic zone in these mountain streams.
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 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 | 0.002 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.003 |
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 it