Permafrost dynamics and their hydrologic impacts over the Russian Arctic drainage basin
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Permafrost is an important component in hydrological processes because changes in runoff over the Arctic drainage basin cannot be well explained by changes in precipitation-related variables. However, current understanding of the influences of permafrost on hydrological dynamics is insufficient. This study investigated historical variations in permafrost conditions and their potential hydrologic effects over the Russian Arctic drainage basin. The results show that soil temperature (at 0.40 m below surface) has increased about 1.4 °C over the Ob, 1.5 °C over the Yenisei, and 1.8 °C over the Lena River basin from 1936 through 2013, possibly resulted in a significant thawing of permafrost. Rapid active layer changes have occurred since the 1970s. The volume of the active layer increased by 28, 142, and 228 km3 over the Ob, Yenisei, and Lena basins, respectively, since the 1970s. Melting ground ice caused by deepening active layer may be a limited contribution to annual runoff. Runoff during freeze season (October–April) showed significant positive correlations (p < 0.05) to active layer thickness in the Yenisei and Lena basins while negative correlation (p > 0.05) in the Ob basin. These results imply that, in basins with high permafrost coverage, a deeper active layer increased soil water storage capacity and perhaps contribute to an increase in winter runoff.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 teacher head, 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".