Summer rainfall recycling for an agricultural region of the Canadian prairies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Water vapour from regional evapotranspiration that falls again as rain within the same region is referred to as recycled rainfall. This study estimated the summer rainfall recycling ratios (i.e., the relative contribution of recycled rain to total rain) for an agricultural region of the Canadian Prairies by examining the soil water balance component of the land surface branch of the water cycle along with the atmospheric branch of the cycle for June-July-August of 1997, 1998 and 1999. Recycled rain accounted for 24 to 35% of the total rainfall. For these three summers, this study also estimated the horizontal water vapour flux divergence for the region, and compared the areal average summer evapotranspiration totals determined from land-use weighted soil water balance modelling and as residuals in the atmospheric water balance equation. The horizontal water vapour flux divergence per unit area averaged 36 mm. The mean difference between the evapotranspiration estimates was about 15%. It can be concluded, for the summers of 1997, 1998 and 1999, that: (1) regional evapotranspiration was secondary to advection, yet significant, as a source of water vapour for rainfall on the Canadian Prairies, (2) the agricultural area of the Canadian Prairies was a source region of water vapour – consistent with the arid character of the climate, and (3) the land-use weighted soil water balance estimates of areal average evapotranspiration were reasonably accurate. Key words: Water cycle, horizontal water vapour flux, evapotranspiration, atmospheric water balance, soil water balance
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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 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".