Assessment of contemporary Arctic river runoff based on observational discharge records
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We describe the contemporary hydrography of the pan‐Arctic land area draining into the Arctic Ocean, northern Bering Sea, and Hudson Bay on the basis of observational records of river discharge and computed runoff. The Regional Arctic Hydrographic Network data set, R‐ArcticNET, is presented, which is based on 3754 recording stations drawn from Russian, Canadian, European, and U.S. archives. R‐ArcticNET represents the single largest data compendium of observed discharge in the Arctic. Approximately 73% of the nonglaciated area of the pan‐Arctic is monitored by at least one river discharge gage giving a mean gage density of 168 gages per 10 6 km 2 . Average annual runoff is 212 mm yr −1 with approximately 60% of the river discharge occurring from April to July. Gridded runoff surfaces are generated for the gaged portion of the pan‐Arctic region to investigate global change signals. Siberia and Alaska showed increases in winter runoff during the 1980s relative to the 1960s and 1970s during annual and seasonal periods. These changes are consistent with observations of change in the climatology of the region. Western Canada experienced decreased spring and summer runoff.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".