MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4322732085 · doi:10.1038/s41467-023-36804-6

Non-monotonic changes in Asian Water Towers’ streamflow at increasing warming levels

2023· article· en· W4322732085 on OpenAlexaff
Tong Cui, Yukun Li, Long Yang, Yi Nan, Kunbiao Li, Mahmut Tudaji, Hongchang Hu, Di Long, Muhammad Shahid, Ammara Mubeen, Zhihua He, Bin Yong, Hui Lü, Chao Li, Guangheng Ni, Chunhong Hu, Fuqiang Tian

Bibliographic record

VenueNature Communications · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicCryospheric studies and observations
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersFundamental Research Funds for the Central UniversitiesState Key Laboratory of Hydroscience and EngineeringNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsSnowmeltEnvironmental scienceStreamflowClimate changePlateau (mathematics)Global warmingFlood mythRiparian zoneHydrology (agriculture)GlacierClimatologyPhysical geographyDrainage basinSnowGeographyGeologyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Previous projections show consistent increases in river flows of Asian Water Towers under future climate change. Here we find non-monotonic changes in river flows for seven major rivers originating from the Tibetan Plateau at the warming levels of 1.5 °C, 2.0 °C, and 3.0 °C based on an observation-constrained hydrological model. The annual mean streamflow for seven rivers at 1.5 °C warming level decreases by 0.1-3.2% relative to the present-day climate condition, and increases by 1.5-12% at 3.0 °C warming level. The shifting river flows for the Yellow, Yangtze, Brahmaputra, and Ganges are mostly influenced by projected increases in rainfall, but those for the Mekong, Salween, and Indus are dictated by the relative changes in rainfall, snowmelt and glacier melt. Reduced river flows in a moderately warmed climate threaten water security in riparian countries, while elevated flood risks are expected with further temperature increases over the Tibetan Plateau.

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.168
Threshold uncertainty score0.845

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.235 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations170
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNature CommunicationsSame topicCryospheric studies and observationsFrench-language works237,207