Full Coupling Between the Atmosphere, Surface, and Subsurface for Integrated Hydrologic Simulation
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract An ever increasing community of earth system modelers is incorporating new physical processes into numerical models. This trend is facilitated by advancements in computational resources, improvements in simulation skill, and the desire to build numerical simulators that represent the water cycle with greater fidelity. In this quest to develop a state‐of‐the‐art water cycle model, we coupled HydroGeoSphere (HGS), a 3‐D control‐volume finite element surface and variably saturated subsurface flow model that includes evapotranspiration processes, to the Weather Research and Forecasting (WRF) Model, a 3‐D finite difference nonhydrostatic mesoscale atmospheric model. The two‐way coupled model, referred to as HGS‐WRF, exchanges the actual evapotranspiration fluxes and soil saturations calculated by HGS to WRF; conversely, the potential evapotranspiration and precipitation fluxes from WRF are passed to HGS. The flexible HGS‐WRF coupling method allows for unique meshes used by each model, while maintaining mass and energy conservation between the domains. Furthermore, the HGS‐WRF coupling implements a subtime stepping algorithm to minimize computational expense. As a demonstration of HGS‐WRF's capabilities, we applied it to the California Basin and found a strong connection between the depth to the groundwater table and the latent heat fluxes across the land surface.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it