MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4290018460 · doi:10.1029/2022jf006674

Modeling the Influence of Moulin Shape on Subglacial Hydrology

2022· article· en· W4290018460 on OpenAlexaff
Celia Trunz, M. D. Covington, Kristin Poinar, Lauren C. Andrews, Jessica Mejía, Jason Gulley

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Geophysical Research Earth Surface · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicCryospheric studies and observations
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
FundersNational Science Foundation
KeywordsMeltwaterGeologyHydrology (agriculture)Range (aeronautics)GeomorphologyOscillation (cell signaling)Water levelGlacierGeographyGeotechnical engineeringChemistryMaterials science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Subglacial models represent moulins as cylinders or cones, but field observations suggest that the upper part of moulins in the Greenland Ice Sheet has more complex shapes. These more complex shapes should cause englacial water storage within moulins to vary as a function of depth, a relationship not currently accounted for in models. Here, we use a coupled englacial‐subglacial channel model to explore how moulin shape affects depth‐dependent moulin water storage and water pressure dynamics within a subglacial channel. We simulate seven different moulin shapes across a range of moulin sizes. We find that the englacial storage capacity at the water level is the main control over the daily water level oscillation range and that depth‐varying changes in englacial water storage control the temporal shape of this oscillation. Further, the cross‐sectional area of the moulin within the daily oscillation range, but not above or below this range, controls pressures within the connected subglacial channel. Specifically, large cross‐sectional areas can dampen daily to weekly oscillations that occur in the surface meltwater supply. Our findings suggest that further knowledge of the shape of moulins around the equilibrium water level would improve englacial storage parameterization in subglacial hydrological models and aid predictions of hydrodynamic coupling.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.544
Threshold uncertainty score0.898

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.060
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.248 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations12
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Geophysical Research Earth SurfaceSame topicCryospheric studies and observationsFrench-language works237,207