Quantifying hydrologic connectivity of wetlands to surface watersystems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. Hydrologic connectivity of wetlands is poorly characterized and understood. Our inability to quantify this connectivity compromises our understanding of the potential impacts of wetland loss on watershed structure, function and water supplies. We develop a computationally efficient physically-based subsurface-surface hydrological model to characterize both the subsurface and surface hydrologic connectivity of "geographically isolated" wetlands and explore the time and length variations in these connections to a river within the Prairie Pothole Region of North America. Despite a high density of geographically isolated wetlands (i.e., wetlands without surface outlets), modeled connections show that these wetlands are not hydrologically isolated. Hydrologic subsurface connectivity differs significantly from surface connectivity in terms of timing and length of connections. Slow subsurface connections between wetlands and the downstream river originate from wetlands throughout the watershed, whereas fast surface connections were limited to large events and originate from wetlands located near the river. This modeling approach provides first ever insight on the nature of geographically isolated wetland subsurface and surface hydrological connections to rivers, and provides valuable information to support watershed-scale decision making for water resource management.
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 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 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".