Low‐dimensional modeling of hillslope subsurface flow: Relationship between rainfall, recharge, and unsaturated storage dynamics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We present a coupling between the one‐dimensional Richards equation for vertical unsaturated flow and the one‐dimensional hillslope‐storage Boussinesq equation (HSB) for lateral saturated flow along complex hillslopes. Here the capillary fringe is included in the flow domain as an integral part of the Boussinesq aquifer. The coupling allows quantitative investigation of the role of unsaturated storage in the relationship between rainfall and recharge. The coupled model (HSB coupled) is compared to the original HSB model (HSB original) and a three‐dimensional Richards equation (RE) based model (taken to be the benchmark) on a set of seven synthetic hillslopes, ranging from convergent to divergent. Using HSB original, the water tables are overestimated and the outflow rates are generally underestimated, and there is no delay between rainfall and recharge. The coupled model, however, shows a remarkably good match with the RE model in terms of outflow rates, and the delay between rainfall and recharge is captured well. We also see a clear improvement in the match to the water tables, even though the values are still overestimated for some hillslope shapes, in particular the convergent slopes. We show that for the hillslope configurations and scenarios examined in this paper it is possible to reproduce hydrographs and water table dynamics with a good degree of accuracy using a low‐dimensional hydrological model.
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 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 | 0.004 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".