MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3126528765 · doi:10.1126/science.aba3996

Globally observed trends in mean and extreme river flow attributed to climate change

2021· article· en· W3126528765 on OpenAlexaff
Lukas Gudmundsson, Julien Boulangé, Hong Xuan, Simon N. Gosling, Manolis Grillakis, Aristeidis Koutroulis, Michael Leonard, Junguo Liu, Hannes Müller Schmied, Lamprini Papadimitriou, Yadu Pokhrel, Sonia I. Seneviratne, Yusuke Satoh, Wim Thiery, Seth Westra, Xuebin Zhang, Fang Zhao

Bibliographic record

VenueScience · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrology and Watershed Management Studies
Canadian institutionsEnvironment and Climate Change Canada
FundersFP7 Ideas: European Research CouncilHorizon 2020 Framework ProgrammeUniscientia FoundationNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaH2020 Societal ChallengesETH Zürich FoundationUniversity of MichiganMinistry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and TechnologyNational Science Foundation
KeywordsClimate changeEnvironmental scienceClimatologyPhysical geographyGeographyOceanographyGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Anthropogenic climate change is expected to affect global river flow. Here, we analyze time series of low, mean, and high river flows from 7250 observatories around the world covering the years 1971 to 2010. We identify spatially complex trend patterns, where some regions are drying and others are wetting consistently across low, mean, and high flows. Trends computed from state-of-the-art model simulations are consistent with the observations only if radiative forcing that accounts for anthropogenic climate change is considered. Simulated effects of water and land management do not suffice to reproduce the observed trend pattern. Thus, the analysis provides clear evidence for the role of externally forced climate change as a causal driver of recent trends in mean and extreme river flow at the global scale.

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)0.002
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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.070
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.188 · 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

Citations615
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScienceSame topicHydrology and Watershed Management StudiesFrench-language works237,207