Characterizing Isotopic Composition and Trajectories of Atmospheric River Events
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Landfalling atmospheric rivers (LARs) are important drivers of mid-latitude climate; however, our understanding of the water vapour sources, storm trajectories, and receiving waters of ARs is limited. This study aims to characterize LARs in southwest British Columbia by their isotopic composition and storm track trajectories and to better understand how AR-derived precipitation is manifested in watershed waters. ARs were depleted (−11.71‰ δ18O, −85.80‰ δ2H, n = 19) compared to non-ARs (−9.47‰ δ18O, −69.58‰ δ2H, n = 32) (p = 0.03); however, the difference is minimal. LAR storm tracks did not show any obvious correlation to their isotopic composition, despite the large variability in their source regions across the Pacific Ocean. The lack of correlation is attributed to mixing air parcels, thereby incorporating moisture with different isotopic compositions into the main transport mechanism. D-excess values for ARs and non-ARs were statistically similar, although seasonal differences were observed. ARs with higher d-excess were sourced from the central Pacific, whereas ARs with lower d-excess had storm tracks through the northern Pacific. Watershed water d-excess values (mean = 8.58 ± 2.97‰) were more similar to winter precipitation (mean = 10.1 ± 5.1‰), compared to summer (mean = 2.8 ± 4.3‰), likely due to their source of winter precipitation at high elevation. A greater range in AR d-excess winter values relative to summer values (3.6–16.6‰, −0.3–6.0‰, respectively) is attributed to storm track variability.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".