Towards a better understanding of the evaporative cooling of rivers: case study for the Little Southwest Miramichi River (New Brunswick, Canada)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Stream temperature plays an important role in many biotic and abiotic processes, as it influences many physical, chemical, and biological properties in rivers. As such, a good understanding of the thermal regime of rivers is essential for effective fisheries management and the protection of aquatic habitats. Moreover, a thorough understanding of underlying physical processes and river heat fluxes is essential in developing better and more adaptive water temperature models. Very few studies have quantified river evaporation and rivers’ corresponding evaporative cooling component. The present study investigated the evaporative cooling of the Little Southwest Miramichi River in Eastern Canada by calculating the evaporative heat flux and overall heat fluxes using in-situ data. Results showed that the evaporative heat flux reached −300 W m−2 mid-day when high water temperatures were observed. The daily evaporative heat flux can thus account for close to 50% of the total heat losses, followed by longwave radiation (25%), streambed heat fluxes (20%), and sensible heat (5%). Our results show that the evaporative heat flux can be a critical cooling mechanism for wide and shallow rivers during high summer temperatures.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".