Rainfall intensity affects runoff responses in a semi‐arid catchment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The source and hydrochemical makeup of a stream reflects the connectivity between rainfall, groundwater, the stream, and is reflected to water quantity and quality of the catchment. However, in a semi‐arid, thick, loess covered catchment, temporal variation of stream source and event associated behaviours are lesser known. Thus, the isotopic and chemical hydrographs in a widely distributed, deep loess, semi‐arid catchment of the northern Chinese Loess Plateau were characterized to determine the source and hydrochemical behaviours of the stream during intra‐rainfall events. Rainfall and streamflow were sampled during six hydrologic events coupled with measurements of stream baseflow and groundwater. The deuterium isotope (2H), major ions (Cl−, SO42−, NO3−, Ca2+, K+, Mg2+, and Na+) were evaluated in water samples obtained during rainfall events. Temporal variation of 2H and Cl− measured in the groundwater and stream baseflow prior to rainfall was similar; however, the isotope compositions of the streamflow fluctuated significantly and responded quickly to rainfall events, likely due to an infiltration excess, overland dominated surface runoff during torrential rainfall events. Time source separation using 2H demonstrated greater than 72% on average, the stream composition was event water during torrential rainfall events, with the proportion increasing with rainfall intensity. Solutes concentrations in the stream had loglinear relationships with stream discharge, with an outling anomaly with an example of an intra‐rainfall event on Oct. 24, 2015. Stream Cl− behaved nonconservative during rainfall events, temporal variation of Cl− indicated a flush and washout at the onset of small rainfall events, a dilution but still high concentration pattern in high discharge and old water dominated in regression flow period. This study indicates rainfall intensity affects runoff responses in a semi‐arid catchment, and the stored water in the thick, loess covered areas was less connected with stream runoff. Solute transport may threaten water quality in the area, requiring further analysis of the performance of the eco‐restoration project.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".