MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2140910850 · doi:10.1002/hyp.7818

Climate change and future flows of Rocky Mountain rivers: converging forecasts from empirical trend projection and down‐scaled global circulation modelling

2010· article· en· W2140910850 on OpenAlexafffund
A. Shepherd, Karen M. Gill, Stewart B. Rood

Bibliographic record

VenueHydrological Processes · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrology and Watershed Management Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of LethbridgeAgriculture Food and Rural Development
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaAlberta Water Research Institute
KeywordsHadCM3BaseflowDownscalingEnvironmental scienceClimatologyStreamflowHydrographClimate changeClimate modelDrainage basinGCM transcription factorsGeneral Circulation ModelGeologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract To predict future river flows, empirical trend projection (ETP) analyses and extends historic trends, while hydroclimatic modelling (HCM) incorporates regional downscaling from global circulation model (GCM) outputs. We applied both approaches to the extensively allocated Oldman River Basin that drains the North American Rocky Mountains and provides an international focus for water sharing. For ETP, we analysed monthly discharges from 1912 to 2008 with non‐parametric regression, and extrapolated changes to 2055. For modelling, we refined the physical models MTCLIM and SNOPAC to provide water inputs into RIVRQ (river discharge), a model that assesses the streamflow regime as involving dynamic peaks superimposed on stable baseflow. After parameterization with 1960–1989 data, we assessed climate forecasts from six GCMs: CGCM1‐A, HadCM3, NCAR‐CCM3, ECHAM4 and 5 and GCM2. Modelling reasonably reconstructed monthly hydrographs ( R 2 about 0·7), and averaging over three decades closely reconstructed the monthly pattern ( R 2 = 0·94). When applied to the GCM forecasts, the model predicted that summer flows would decline considerably, while winter and early spring flows would increase, producing a slight decline in the annual discharge (−3%, 2005–2055). The ETP predicted similarly decreased summer flows but slight change in winter flows and greater annual flow reduction (−9%). The partial convergence of the seasonal flow projections increases confidence in a composite analysis and we thus predict further declines in summer (about − 15%) and annual flows (about − 5%). This composite projection indicates a more modest change than had been anticipated based on earlier GCM analyses or trend projections that considered only three or four decades. For other river basins, we recommend the utilization of ETP based on the longest available streamflow records, and HCM with multiple GCMs. The degree of correspondence from these two independent approaches would provide a basis for assessing the confidence in projections for future river flows and surface water supplies. Copyright © 2010 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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.569
Threshold uncertainty score0.390

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.220 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations52
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHydrological ProcessesSame topicHydrology and Watershed Management StudiesFrench-language works237,207