MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401174087 · doi:10.1029/2023wr036900

Streamflow Intermittence in Europe: Estimating High‐Resolution Monthly Time Series by Downscaling of Simulated Runoff and Random Forest Modeling

2024· article· en· W4401174087 on OpenAlexafffund
Petra Döll, Mahdi Abbasi, Mathis Messager, Tim Trautmann, Bernhard Lehner, Nicolas Lamouroux

Bibliographic record

VenueWater Resources Research · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrology and Watershed Management Studies
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaAgence Nationale de la Recherche
KeywordsStreamflowDownscalingEnvironmental sciencePerennial plantSurface runoffClimatologySeries (stratigraphy)Hydrology (agriculture)PrecipitationMeteorologyGeographyGeologyDrainage basinEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Knowing where and when rivers cease to flow provides an important basis for evaluating riverine biodiversity, biogeochemistry and ecosystem services. We present a novel modeling approach to estimate monthly time series of streamflow intermittence at high spatial resolution at the continental scale. Streamflow intermittence is quantified at more than 1.5 million river reaches in Europe as the number of no‐flow days grouped into five classes (0, 1–5, 6–15, 16–29, 30–31 no‐flow days) for each month from 1981 to 2019. Daily time series of observed streamflow at 3706 gauging stations were used to train and validate a two‐step random forest modeling approach. Important predictors were derived from time series of monthly streamflow at 73 million 15 arc‐sec (∼500 m) grid cells that were computed by downscaling the 0.5 arc‐deg (∼55 km) output of the global hydrological model WaterGAP, which accounts for human water use. Of the observed perennial and non‐perennial station‐months, 97.8% and 86.4%, respectively, were correctly predicted. Interannual variations of the number of non‐perennial months at non‐perennial reaches were satisfactorily simulated, with a median Pearson correlation of 0.5. While the spatial prevalence of non‐perennial reaches is underestimated, the number of non‐perennial months is overestimated in dry regions of Europe where artificial storage abounds. Our model estimates that 3.8% of all European reach‐months and 17.2% of all reaches were non‐perennial during 1981–2019, predominantly with 30–31 no‐flow days. Although estimation uncertainty is high, our study provides, for the first time, information on the continent‐wide dynamics of non‐perennial rivers and streams.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.044

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.247 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations22
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWater Resources ResearchSame topicHydrology and Watershed Management StudiesFrench-language works237,207