MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2619909272 · doi:10.5194/hess-21-2595-2017

Examining the impacts of precipitation isotope input ( <i>δ</i> <sup>18</sup> O <sub>ppt</sub> ) on distributed, tracer-aided hydrological modelling

2017· article· en· W2619909272 on OpenAlexafffundabout
C. J. Delavau, Tricia Stadnyk, Tegan Holmes

Bibliographic record

VenueHydrology and earth system sciences · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrology and Watershed Management Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of Waterloo
KeywordsStreamflowPrecipitationEnvironmental scienceHydrographSnowmeltLatitudeδ18OHydrological modellingTRACERIsotopeSnowClimatologyStable isotope ratioDrainage basinAtmospheric sciencesMeteorologyGeologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. Tracer-aided hydrological models are becoming increasingly popular tools as they assist with process understanding and source separation, which facilitates model calibration and diagnosis of model uncertainty (Tetzlaff et al., 2015; Klaus and McDonnell, 2013). Data availability in high-latitude regions, however, proves to be a major challenge associated with this type of application (Tetzlaff et al., 2015). Models require a time series of isotopes in precipitation (δ18Oppt) to drive simulations, and throughout much of the world – particularly in sparsely populated high-latitude regions – these data are not widely available. Here we investigate the impact that choice of precipitation isotope product (δ18Oppt) has on simulations of streamflow, δ18O in streamflow (δ18OSF), resulting hydrograph separations, and model parameters. In a high-latitude, data-sparse, seasonal basin (Fort Simpson, NWT, Canada), we assess three precipitation isotope products of different spatial and temporal resolutions (i.e. semi-annual static, seasonal KPN43, and daily bias-corrected REMOiso), and apply them to force the isoWATFLOOD tracer-aided hydrologic model. Total simulated streamflow is not significantly impacted by choice of δ18Oppt product; however, simulated isotopes in streamflow (δ18OSF) and the internal apportionment of water (driven by model parameterization) are impacted. The highest-resolution product (REMOiso) was distinct from the two lower-resolution products (KPN43 and static), but could not be verified as correct due to a lack of daily δ18Oppt observations. The resolution of δ18Oppt impacts model parameterization and seasonal hydrograph separations, producing notable differences among simulations following large snowmelt and rainfall events when event compositions differ significantly from δ18OSF. Capturing and preserving the spatial variability in δ18Oppt using distributed tracer-aided models is important because this variability impacts model parameterization. We achieve an understanding of tracer-aided modelling and its application in high-latitude regions with limited δ18Oppt observations, and the value such models have in defining modelling uncertainty. In this study, application of a tracer-aided model is able to identify simulations with improved internal process representation, reinforcing the fact that tracer-aided modelling approaches assist with resolving hydrograph component contributions and work towards diagnosing equifinality.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.090
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.202 · 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.

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

Citations60
Published2017
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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