MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

An analysis of terrestrial water and groundwater storage changes in North America using recent GRACE products

2020· article· en· W3090593947 on OpenAlexaffabout
Michael G. Sideris, Dimitrios Piretzidis

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeophysics and Gravity Measurements
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsData assimilationEnvironmental scienceGroundwaterArcticPost-glacial reboundWater storageBayClimatologyHydrology (agriculture)OceanographyGeologyGeographyMeteorologySea level

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this study, we use temporal solutions of the Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment (GRACE) satellite mission to study the surface mass variations of hydrological origin in North America. The most recent release (RL06) of GRACE Level 2 data from three processing centers (CSR, JPL, GFZ) and mascon products are used in a combination scheme to produce estimates of terrestrial water storage (TWS) changes for the period 2002–2016. The land hydrology signal is isolated from GRACE data by removing the contribution of two major non-hydrologic processes, i.e., the glacial isostatic adjustment (GIA) and the ice mass melting from the glaciated areas of Alaska, Greenland and the Canadian Arctic. The examination of long-term TWS trends revealed strong signatures of the 2011–2015 droughts in California and Texas, as well as accumulation of TWS in the central part of North America. Negative long-term TWS trends associated with ice melting were found around the Hudson Bay region. The TWS changes are dominated by a strong annual and semi-annual signal with higher magnitude in Alaska and along the west coast of North America. An additional study on the estimation of groundwater storage (GWS) changes is performed using the Global Land Data Assimilation System (GLDAS) model. The GLDAS data are pre-filtered using the same strategy as GRACE data to ensure spectral consistency between them. The general behavior of GWS agrees well with the TWS, especially in terms of positive long-term GWS trends in central North America and strong annual signal in Alaska. Positive GWS trends are also identified in the east US coast.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.055
Threshold uncertainty score0.110

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.182 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGeophysics and Gravity MeasurementsFrench-language works237,207