Continuous prediction of clay‐bed stream erosion in response to climate model output for a small urban watershed
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The response of the semi‐alluvial clay‐bed Watts Creek is assessed subject to climate change. Climate impacts are expected to have regional variability, and few studies have assessed the impacts of future climate in a small urban watershed. The 21‐km2 watershed located in Ottawa, Ontario, Canada, is highly urbanized (68%) and agricultural (20%) with limited forest cover (12%). Continuous simulations were performed using the SWMHYMO lumped hydrologic modelling platform for the open water year, excluding spring freshet (April 1 to October 31). A shear stress exceedance and stream power erosion routine was added to the platform to calculate erosion potential. To account for uncertainty in the collected data, 9 different field datasets were used to calibrate the model, each leading to a distinct set of calibrated parameter values. The difference between the datasets lies in the choice of the rating curves and calibration period. The 2041–2080 precipitation outputs of the 4th version of the Canadian Regional Climate Model (CanRCM4) ran under representative concentration pathways (RCPs) 4.5 and 8.5 at the MacDonald Cartier International Airport were downscaled using quantile matching and then used as input to the continuous hydrologic model. For each set of calibrated parameters, a cumulative effective work index based on the reach‐averaged shear stress was calculated for Watts Creek using both the historic (1967–2007) and projected future (2041–2080) flows, using a bed material critical shear stress for entrainment of 3.7 Pa. These results suggest an increase of 75% (respectively 139%) under RCP4.5 (respectively RCP8.5) in cumulative effective work index compared with historic conditions for the average measured bed strength. The work index increase is driven by an increased occurrence of above‐threshold events and, more importantly, by the increased frequency of large events. The predicted flow regime under climate change would significantly alter the erosion potential and stability of Watts Creek.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".