Modelling groundwater–surface water mixing in a headwater wetland: implications for hydrograph separation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Many headwater wetlands contain seasonally or permanently saturated areas adjacent to streams, in small depressions or in regional or local groundwater discharge zones. Environmental isotopes indicate that pre-event water dominates the storm period from these headwater wetlands, however, saturated overland flow usually dominates stormflow at these sites supposedly making groundwater contributions relatively less important as a runoff mechanism. Mixing of event water with surface storage water transported by saturated overland flow has been suggested as an alternative mechanism to account for large volumes of pre-event water during saturated overland flow stormflow. In this paper we present results from various model simulations of groundwater–surface-water mixing in a headwater wetland. In the model we have varied both local and groundwater contributions to the wetland, precipitation intensity and the initial ‘wetness’ of the wetland to better understand the processes controlling both stormflow and water chemistry. Surface water mixing is shown to be an important process during low, moderate and high intensity events. Results from these simulations are used to predict the effect of reduced groundwater input to the wetlands on stormflow and water chemistry. Copyright © 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
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 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".