MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4220759821 · doi:10.5194/egusphere-egu22-424

Modelling Subglacial Hydrology under Future Climate Scenarios in Wilkes Subglacial Basin, Antarctica

2022· preprint· en· W4220759821 on OpenAlexaff
Kevin Siu, Christine F. Dow, Mathieu Morlighem, Felicity S. McCormack, Tim Hill

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicCryospheric studies and observations
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser UniversityUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMeltwaterFuture sea levelCryosphereGlacierGeologyIce sheetGreenland ice sheetClimate changeIce streamIce shelfClimate modelAntarctic ice sheetSurface runoffSea iceClimatologyIce-sheet modelOceanographyHydrology (agriculture)Geomorphology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets have differing climates, which makes surface melt a significant hydrological source in Greenland but not currently in Antarctica. Due to changing climate and warming air temperatures, Antarctica is predicted to experience more surface meltwater in the future. This will likely lead to surface features common in Greenland today, such as supraglacial lakes and moulins, to also form over grounded ice in Antarctica. Moulins in particular are important because they will route this surface melt into basal drainage networks. The resulting change in subglacial drainage characteristics and water volumes will potentially have far-reaching impacts on ice dynamics, ice shelf melt, grounding line stability, and ultimately global sea level rise. To examine this, we model the hydrological system in Wilkes Subglacial Basin, East Antarctica with the future climate in mind by incorporating moulins and surface melt to try to understand the impact that this will have on ice sheet and ice shelf dynamics. We use predictive data generated by the Community Climate System Model 4 (CCSM4) for surface runoff in Antarctica for the year 2100 as inputs to the Glacier Drainage System (GlaDS) subglacial hydrology model. We compare the modelling results from two different Representative Concentration Pathway (RCP) scenarios, RCP 2.6 and RCP 8.5. Moulin locations are predicted using current strain rates along preferential surface hydrology flow pathways and we also compare modelling results with different numbers and locations of moulins. Preliminary results show that even under the lower RCP 2.6 scenario, surface water input significantly alters basal drainage rates, channel extent, and water pressure near the grounding line. The changes are focussed during the modelled summer melt season with the hydrological system settling towards its current state over winter. This demonstrates that the future state of the climate will have an impact on the subglacial hydrology of Antarctica and, in turn, on ice flow speeds and ice shelf melt rates near the grounding line.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.183
Threshold uncertainty score0.364

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.209 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations3
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCryospheric studies and observations→French-language works237,207→