A Global Data Analysis for Representing Sediment and Particulate Organic Carbon Yield in Earth System Models
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Although sediment yield (SY) from water erosion is ubiquitous and its environmental consequences are well recognized, its impacts on the global carbon cycle remain largely uncertain. This knowledge gap is partly due to the lack of soil erosion modeling in Earth System Models (ESMs), which are important tools used to understand the global carbon cycle and explore its changes. This study analyzed sediment and particulate organic carbon yield (CY) data from 1,081 and 38 small catchments (0.1–200 km2), respectively, in different environments across the globe. Using multiple statistical analysis techniques, we explored environmental factors and hydrological processes important for SY and CY modeling in ESMs. Our results show clear correlations of high SY with traditional agriculture, seismicity and heavy storms, as well as strong correlations between SY and annual peak runoff. These highlight the potential limitation of SY models that represent only interrill and rill erosion because shallow overland flow and rill flow have limited transport capacity due to their hydraulic geometry to produce high SY. Further, our results suggest that SY modeling in ESMs should be implemented at the event scale to produce the catastrophic mass transport during episodic events. Several environmental factors such as seismicity and land management that are often not considered in current catchment‐scale SY models can be important in controlling global SY. Our analyses show that SY is likely the primary control on CY in small catchments and a statistically significant empirical relationship is established to calculate SY and CY jointly in ESMs.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".