MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2101006738 · doi:10.1029/2008gl037049

Reconstructing annual inflows to the headwater catchments of the Murray River, Australia, using the Pacific Decadal Oscillation

2009· article· en· W2101006738 on OpenAlexaff
Hamish A. McGowan, Samuel K. Marx, John Denholm, Joshua Soderholm, Balz S. Kamber

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysical Research Letters · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrology and Watershed Management Studies
Canadian institutionsLaurentian University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPacific decadal oscillationEl Niño Southern OscillationOceanographyClimatologyGeologyHydrology (agriculture)Southern oscillationEnvironmental science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Pacific Decadal Oscillation (PDO) is a major forcing of inter‐decadal to quasi‐centennial variability of the hydroclimatology of the Pacific Basin. Its effects are most pronounced in the extra‐tropical regions, while it modulates the El Niño Southern Oscillation (ENSO), the largest forcing of global inter‐annual climate variability. Palaeo‐PDO indices are now available for at least the past 500 years. Here we show that the >500 year PDO index of Shen et al. (2006) is highly correlated with inflows to the headwaters of Australia's longest river system, the Murray‐Darling. We then use the PDO to reconstruct annual inflows to the Murray River back to A.D. 1474. These show penta‐decadal and quasi‐centennial cycles of low inflows and a possible 500 year cycle of much greater inflow variability. Superimposed on this is the likely influence of recent anthropogenic global warming. We believe this may explain the exceptionally low inflows of the past decade, the lowest of the previous 529 years.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.072
Threshold uncertainty score0.144

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.325
Teacher spread0.280 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations68
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeophysical Research LettersSame topicHydrology and Watershed Management StudiesFrench-language works237,207