MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2356856182 · doi:10.5194/hess-20-1785-2016

High-end climate change impact on European runoff and low flows – exploring the effects of forcing biases

2016· article· en· W2356856182 on OpenAlexaff
Lamprini Papadimitriou, Aristeidis Koutroulis, Manolis Grillakis, Ioannis K. Tsanis

Bibliographic record

VenueHydrology and earth system sciences · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrology and Watershed Management Studies
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersEuropean CommissionDirectorate-General for Research and InnovationU.S. Department of Energy
KeywordsEnvironmental scienceClimatologyForcing (mathematics)Global warmingSurface runoffClimate changeClimate modelMagnitude (astronomy)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. Climate models project a much more substantial warming than the 2 °C target under the more probable emission scenarios, making higher-end scenarios increasingly plausible. Freshwater availability under such conditions is a key issue of concern. In this study, an ensemble of Euro-CORDEX projections under RCP8.5 is used to assess the mean and low hydrological states under +4 °C of global warming for the European region. Five major European catchments were analysed in terms of future drought climatology and the impact of +2 °C versus +4 °C global warming was investigated. The effect of bias correction of the climate model outputs and the observations used for this adjustment was also quantified. Projections indicate an intensification of the water cycle at higher levels of warming. Even for areas where the average state may not considerably be affected, low flows are expected to reduce, leading to changes in the number of dry days and thus drought climatology. The identified increasing or decreasing runoff trends are substantially intensified when moving from the +2 to the +4° of global warming. Bias correction resulted in an improved representation of the historical hydrology. It is also found that the selection of the observational data set for the application of the bias correction has an impact on the projected signal that could be of the same order of magnitude to the selection of the Global Climate Model (GCM).

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.196 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations65
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHydrology and earth system sciencesSame topicHydrology and Watershed Management StudiesFrench-language works237,207