Groundwater Controls on Postfire Permafrost Thaw: Water and Energy Balance Effects
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 Fire frequency and severity are increasing in high‐latitude regions, but the degree to which groundwater flow impacts the response of permafrost to fire remains poorly understood. Here we use the Anaktuvuk River Fire (Alaska, USA) as an example for simulating groundwater‐permafrost interactions following fire. We identify key thermal and hydrologic parameters controlling permafrost response to fire both with and without groundwater flow, and separate the relative influence of changes to the water and energy balances on active layer thickness. Our results show that mineral soil porosity, which influences the bulk subsurface thermal conductivity, is a key parameter controlling active layer response to fire in both the absence and presence of groundwater flow. However, including groundwater flow in models increases the perceived importance of subsurface hydrologic properties, such as the soil permeability, and decreases the perceived importance of subsurface thermal properties, such as the thermal conductivity of soil solids. Furthermore, we demonstrate that changes to the energy balance (increased soil temperature) drive increased active layer thickness following fire, while changes to the water balance (decreased groundwater recharge) lead to reduced landscape‐scale variability in active layer thickness and groundwater discharge to surface water features such as streams. These results indicate that explicit consideration of groundwater flow is critical to understanding how permafrost environments respond to fire.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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