MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Climatic Controls on Streamflow and Suspended Sediment Transport in Three Large Middle Arctic Catchments, Boothia Peninsula, Nunavut, Canada

2005· article· en· W2175264130 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Andrew C. Forbes, Scott F. Lamoureux

Bibliographic record

VenueArctic Antarctic and Alpine Research · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicClimate change and permafrost
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersNatural Resources Canada
KeywordsStreamflowSnowpackEnvironmental scienceArcticSedimentHydrology (agriculture)SnowDrainage basinWatershedDischargeSediment transportGeologyOceanographyGeographyGeomorphology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Streamflow, suspended sediment transport, and meteorological variables were measured during two field seasons in order to determine the climatic controls on daily discharge and suspended sediment load for three large middle arctic catchments. Substantive suspended sediment transfer only occurred during the short-lived nival peak, and the duration of the peak appears to be broadly scaled with interannual catchment snow water equivalence (SWE). Thermal energy was critical in generating streamflow and suspended sediment transfer, but only until watershed snowpack had been exhausted. Thus, total annual suspended sediment load in this environment is ultimately a function of total discharge through SWE rather than melt energy. Specific sediment yields were some of the lowest recorded in the arctic, ranging between 0.2 and 1.9 t km−2·a−1. This study demonstrates the sensitivity middle arctic watersheds to both winter snowpack and spring thermal conditions and provides a basis for understanding the hydrological impact of future climate changes.

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 score0.031
Threshold uncertainty score0.084

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.233 · 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

Citations67
Published2005
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArctic Antarctic and Alpine ResearchSame topicClimate change and permafrostFrench-language works237,207