Predicting Hydrological Change in an Alpine Glacierized Basin and Its Sensitivity to Landscape Evolution and Meteorological Forcings
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Shifting precipitation patterns, a warming climate, changing snow dynamics and retreating glaciers are occurring simultaneously in glacierized mountain headwaters. To predict future hydrological behavior in an exemplar glacierized basin, a spatially distributed, physically based cold regions process hydrological model including on and off‐glacier process representations was applied to the Peyto Glacier Research Basin in the Canadian Rockies. The model was forced with bias‐corrected outputs from a high‐resolution Weather and Research Forecasting (WRF‐PGW) atmospheric simulation for 2000–2015, and under pseudo‐global warming for 2085–2100 under a business‐as‐usual climate change scenario. The simulations show that the end‐of‐century increase in precipitation nearly compensates for the decreased ice melt associated with almost complete deglaciation, resulting in a decrease in annual streamflow of 7%. However, the timing of streamflow advances drastically, with peak flow shifting from July to June, and August streamflow dropping by 68%. To examine the sensitivity of future hydrology to possible future drainage basin biophysical attributes, the end‐of‐century simulations were run under a range of initial conditions and parameters and showed the highest sensitivity to initial ice volume and surface water storage capacity. This comprehensive examination suggests that hydrological compensation between declining icemelt and increasing rainfall and snowmelt runoff as well as between deglaciation and increasing basin depressional storage capacity play important roles in determining future streamflow in a rapidly deglaciating high‐mountain environment. Conversely, afforestation and soil development had relatively smaller impacts on future hydrology.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".