Linking the Surface and Subsurface in River Deltas—Part 1: Relating Surface and Subsurface Geometries
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract River deltas are densely populated regions of the world with vulnerable groundwater reserves. Contamination of these groundwater aquifers via saline water intrusion and pollutant transport is a growing threat due to both anthropogenic and climate changes. The arrangement and composition of subsurface sediment is known to have a significant impact on aquifer contamination; however, developing accurate depictions of the subsurface is challenging. In this work, we explore the relationship between surface and subsurface properties and identify the metrics most sensitive to different forcing conditions. To do so, we simulate river delta evolution with the rule‐based numerical model, DeltaRCM, and test the influence of input sand fraction and steady sea level rise (SLR) on delta evolution. From the model outputs, we measure a variety of surface and subsurface metrics chosen based on their applicability to imagery and modeling results. The Kullback‐Leibler (KL) divergence is then used to quantitatively gauge which metrics are most indicative of the imposed forcings. Both qualitative observations and the KL divergence analysis suggest that estimates of subsurface connectivity can be constrained using surface information. In particular, more variable shoreline roughness values and higher surface wetted fraction values correspond to increased subsurface connectivity. These findings complement traditional methods of estimating subsurface structure in river‐dominated delta systems and represent a step toward the identification of a direct link between surface observations and subsurface form.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".