MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Patterns of Intra-Seasonal Groundwater Recharge Inferred from Streamflow and Explained by Vadose Zone Storage Deficits

2024· preprint· en· W4400641654 on OpenAlexaff
Noah Benitez-Nelson, David Dralle, W. Jesse Hahm, Daniella Rempe

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicGroundwater flow and contamination studies
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVadose zoneGroundwater rechargeStreamflowGroundwaterHydrology (agriculture)Environmental scienceWater storageGeologyAquiferGeographyOceanographyGeotechnical engineeringCartography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In forested, seasonally dry watersheds, winter rains commonly replenish water storage deficits in the vadose zone before recharging underlying hillslope groundwater systems that sustain streamflow. However, the relative inaccessibility of the subsurface has hindered efforts to include the role of storage deficits, primarily generated by plant-water uptake, in moderating groundwater recharge. Here, we compare groundwater recharge inferred from the storage-discharge relationship with independent, distributed estimates of vadose zone storage deficits across 12 undisturbed California watersheds, thereby tracking the evolution of the deficit-recharge relationship without intensive field instrumentation. We find accrued deficits during the dry season (driven by evapotranspiration) alone insufficiently explain differences in the wet season partitioning of rainfall due to the inter-storm behavior of the deficit during the subsequent wet season. Tracking the deficit at the storm event-scale within the wet season reveals a characteristic response in groundwater to increasing rainfall not captured in the seasonal analysis, and may improve estimates of the rainfall required to generate recharge and streamflow on a per-storm basis. Our findings demonstrate the potential for existing public datasets to better capture water partitioning within the subsurface using a combined deficit-recharge approach, though our analysis is currently limited to basins with select characteristics.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.034
Threshold uncertainty score0.068

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.207 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGroundwater flow and contamination studies→French-language works237,207→