Trend and Variance of Continental Fresh Water Discharge over the Last Six Decades
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Trend estimation of river discharge is an important but difficult task because discharge time series are nonlinear and nonstationary. Previous studies estimated the trend of discharge using a linear method, which is not applicable to nonstationary time series with a nonlinear trend. To overcome this problem, we used a recently developed wavelet-based method, ensemble empirical mode decomposition (EEMD), which can separate nonstationary variations from the long-term nonlinear trend. Applying EEMD to annual discharge data of the 925 world’s largest rivers from 1948–2004, we found that the global discharge decreased before 1978 and increased after 1978, which contrasts the nonsignificant trend as estimated by the linear method over the same period. Further analyses show that precipitation had a consistent and dominant influence on the interannual variation of discharge of all six continents and globally, but the influences of precipitation and surface air temperature on the trend of discharge varied regionally. We also found that the estimated trend using EEMD was very sensitive to the discharge data length. Our results demonstrated some useful applications of the EEMD method in studying regional or global discharge, and it should be adopted for studying all nonstationary hydrological time series.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".