MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3094102215 · doi:10.1175/jhm-d-19-0281.1

Linking Atmospheric Rivers to Annual and Extreme River Runoff in British Columbia and Southeastern Alaska

2020· article· en· W3094102215 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Aseem R. Sharma, Stephen J. Déry

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Hydrometeorology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicCryospheric studies and observations
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Northern British Columbia
FundersGlobal Water Futures
KeywordsSurface runoffEnvironmental scienceHydrology (agriculture)WatershedPlateau (mathematics)Flood mythGeologyGeographyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This study quantifies the contribution of atmospheric rivers (ARs) to annual and extreme river runoff and evaluates the relationships between watershed characteristics and AR-related maximum river runoff across British Columbia and southeastern Alaska (BCSAK). Datasets used include gauged runoff from 168 unregulated watersheds, topographic characteristics of those watersheds, a regional AR catalog, and integrated vapor transport fields for water years (WYs) 1979–2016. ARs contribute ~22% of annual river runoff along the Coast and Insular Mountains watersheds, which decreases inland to ~11% in the watersheds of the Interior Mountains and Plateau. Average association between ARs and annual maximum river runoff attains >80%, >50%, and <50% along the watersheds of the western flanks of the Coast Mountains, the Interior Mountains, and Interior Plateau, respectively. There is no significant change in AR-related extreme annual maximum runoff across BCSAK during 1979–2016. AR conditions occur during 25 out of 32 of the flood-related natural disasters in British Columbia during WYs 1979–2016. AR-related annual maximum runoff magnitude is significantly higher than non-AR-related annual maximum runoff for 30% of the watersheds studied. Smaller and steeper watersheds closer to the coast are more susceptible to AR-related annual maximum runoff than their inland counterparts. These results illustrate the importance of AR activity as a major control for the distribution of peak runoff in BCSAK. This work provides insights on the hydrological response of watersheds of northwestern North America to landfalling ARs that may improve flood risk assessment and disaster management in this region.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.059
Threshold uncertainty score0.954

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.193
Teacher spread0.177 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations21
Published2020
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of HydrometeorologySame topicCryospheric studies and observationsFrench-language works237,207