MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2133894646 · doi:10.1002/hyp.6209

Regional differences in response of flow in glacier‐fed Himalayan rivers to climatic warming

2006· article· en· W2133894646 on OpenAlexfundno aff
H. Gwyn Rees, David N. Collins

Bibliographic record

VenueHydrological Processes · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicCryospheric studies and observations
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCentre for Ecology and HydrologyDepartment for International DevelopmentInternational Development Research Centre
KeywordsGlacierClimate changeEnvironmental scienceStreamflowPrecipitationGlobal warmingGlacier mass balanceDrainage basinHydrology (agriculture)Surface runoffClimatologyClimate modelPhysical geographyGeologyGeographyMeteorologyEcologyOceanography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract River flow from glacierized areas in the Himalaya is influenced both by intra‐annual variations in precipitation and energy availability, and by longer term changes in storage of water as glacier ice. High specific discharge from ice melt often dominates flow for considerable distances downstream, particularly where other sources of runoff are limited, providing a major water resource. Should Himalayan glaciers continue to retreat rapidly, water shortages might be widespread within a few decades. However, given the difference in climate between the drier western and monsoonal eastern ends of the region, future warming is unlikely to affect river flow uniformly throughout. A simple temperature‐index‐based hydro‐glaciological model, in which glacier dimensions are allowed to decline through time, has been developed with a view to assessing, in data‐sparse areas, by how much and when climate warming will reduce Himalayan glacier dimensions and affect downstream river flows. Two glaciers having the same initial geometries were located (one each) in the headwaters of two identical nests of hypothetical catchments, representing contrasting climates in the west and east of the region. The hypothetical catchments were nested such that percentage ice cover declined with increasing basin area. Model parameters were validated against available but limited mass‐balance and river flow measurements. The model was applied for 150 years from an arbitrary start date (1990), first with standard‐period (1961–1990) climate data and then with application of a 0·06 °C year −1 transient climatic warming scenario. Under this warming scenario, Himalayan rivers fed by large glaciers descending through considerable elevation range will respond in a broadly similar manner, except that summer snowfall in the east will suppress the rate of initial flow increase, delay peak discharge and postpone eventual disappearance of the ice. Impacts of declining glacier area on river flow will be greater in smaller and more highly glacierized basins in both the west and east, and in the west, where precipitation is scarce, for considerable distances downstream. Copyright © 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.053

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.193 · 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

Citations302
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHydrological ProcessesSame topicCryospheric studies and observationsFrench-language works237,207