The process of winter streamflow generation in a subarctic Precambrian Shield catchment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract There have been widespread increases in winter streamflow across the circumpolar north since the mid to late 1900s. However, the physical processes that result in winter runoff generation are not well understood. The objective of this research was to determine the runoff generation processes and pathways of cold season streamflow, and to compare and contrast them with those of spring freshet in a subarctic Canadian Shield study catchment in which winter streamflow regime changes have been documented. Traditional hydrometric methods were used in conjunction with modelling and hydrochemistry to estimate runoff sources and pathways. Results suggest that while runoff generation processes do not necessarily differ between spring and winter runoff events, the timing at which pre‐event and event water contributes does differ. Furthermore, the periods in which certain runoff pathways activate and deactivate are different. Runoff during the spring freshet is dominated by pre‐event water that has not been exposed to the subsurface. In contrast, and most notably, isotopic chemistry reveals that 72% of high cold season streamflow is from new precipitation. In Precambrian Shield regions, or in other landscapes where there may be a large fraction of lakes, late autumn rainfall can increase lake levels, and in turn, storage, to ample volumes that can provide high amounts of winter runoff. Where autumn rainfall has been increasing, precipitation and surface water should be considered as a source of enhanced winter streamflow in these types of landscapes. These results have implications for how widespread environmental changes in the circumpolar north, especially those of aquatic chemistry and permafrost thaw, should be interpreted and predicted. © 2013 Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada. Hydrological Processes. © 2013 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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".