Bibliographic record
Abstract
Climate warming may cause mountain snowpacks to melt earlier, reducing summer streamflow and threatening water supplies and ecosystems. Few observations allow separating rain and snowmelt contributions to streamflow, so physically based models are needed for hydrological predictions and analyses. We develop an observational technique for detecting streamflow responses to snowmelt using incoming solar radiation and diel (daily) cycles of streamflow. We measure the 20th percentile of snowmelt days (DOS20), across 31 watersheds in the western US, as a proxy for the beginning of snowmelt-initiated streamflow. Historic DOS20 varies from mid-January to late May, with warmer sites having earlier and more intermittent snowmelt-mediated streamflow. Mean annual DOS20 strongly correlates with the dates of 25 % and 50 % annual streamflow volume (DOQ25 and DOQ50, both R2 = 0.85), suggesting that a one-day earlier DOS20 corresponds with a one-day earlier DOQ25 and 0.7-day earlier DOQ50. Empirical projections of future DOS20 (RCP8.5, late 21st century), using space-for-time substitution, show that DOS20 will occur 11 ± 4 days earlier per 1 °C of warming, and that colder places (mean November–February air temperature, TNDJF <−8 °C) are 70 % more sensitive to climate change on average than warmer places (TNDJF > 0 °C). Moreover, empirical space-for-time based projections of DOQ25 and DOQ50 are about four and two times more sensitive to earlier streamflow than those from NoahMP-WRF. Given the importance of changing streamflow timing for headwater resources, snowmelt detection methods such as DOS20 based on diel streamflow cycles may constrain hydrological models and improve hydrological predictions.
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 | 0.003 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.014 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.096 | 0.060 |
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".