MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Attenuation of High-Frequency Interannual Streamflow Variability by Watershed Glacial Cover

2005· article· en· W2111346524 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Sean W. Fleming, Garry K. C. Clarke

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Hydraulic Engineering · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrology and Watershed Management Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsBaseflowStreamflowHydrographGlacial periodWatershedEnvironmental sciencePhysical geographySeries (stratigraphy)ClimatologyHydrology (agriculture)GeologyDrainage basinGeographyGeomorphology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We used nonparametric statistical and time-series analysis techniques to investigate the effects of watershed glacial cover upon interannual variability in a suite of hydrometric variables describing aspects of the annual hydrograph. Annual time series of eight streamflow-derived metrics were considered for each of five glacier-fed and four nival rivers in the southwestern Canadian subarctic. Our conclusions at p⩽0.05 are (1) rank-based coefficients of variation (CV) in robust measures of freshet-related flow magnitude and timing scale inversely with watershed glacierization; (2) CVs in extreme events measures do not exhibit a statistically significant relationship to degree of glacial cover; and (3) CVs in winter baseflow measures also show no glacial moderating influences. The CV results expand substantially upon previous work and are readily physically interpretable. Additionally, spectral analyses tentatively suggest that glacierization predominantly attenuates hydroclimatic variability at timescales of about 2–3 years or less.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.034
Threshold uncertainty score0.068

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.190
Teacher spread0.186 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations46
Published2005
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Hydraulic EngineeringSame topicHydrology and Watershed Management StudiesFrench-language works237,207