Assessment of Columbia and Willamette River flood stage on the Columbia Corridor Levee System at Portland, Oregon, in a future climate
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
First posted March 4, 2019 For additional information, contact: Director, Oregon Water Science CenterU.S. Geological Survey2130 SW 5th AvenuePortland, Oregon 97201 To support Levee Ready Columbia’s (LRC’s) effort to re-certify levees along the Columbia and Willamette Rivers and remain accredited, two 2-dimensional hydraulic models, Adaptive Hydraulics and Delft3D-Flexible Mesh, were used to simulate the effects of plausible extreme high water during the 2030 to 2059 period. The Columbia River was simulated from Bonneville Dam, situated at river mile (RM) 145, to the mouth of Columbia River, and the Willamette River was simulated from Willamette Falls, RM 26.2, to the Columbia River confluence. Inputs to the models included light detection and ranging (lidar) and bathymetric mapping data to determine bed level, and boundary conditions in the form of daily inflow hydrographs and water levels in the ocean offshore of the mouth of the Columbia River.Future conditions were based on climate science data developed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and others. These conditions included future streamflow and coastal ocean water levels. The hypothetical, extreme but plausible, upstream boundary was based on scaling up the hydrographs from the 1996 flood. Scaling factors were determined by comparing the peak flow rankings determined from flood frequency analyses of historical unregulated periods and 2040s simulated unregulated winter streamflow. The comparison resulted in scaling up the Columbia River hydrograph by 40-percent and scaling up the Willamette River and Lower Columbia River tributaries hydrographs by 20-percent. The downstream ocean boundary was based on a combination of sea-level change, high tide, and storm surge.The models were calibrated for two historical periods: (1) from January 15 to February 28, 1996, and (2) from April 12 to July 12, 1997. The two models compared well to the measured water-surface elevation over the historical periods and had good performance statistics, with root-mean square error ranging from 0.085 to 0.32 meters, Nash-Sutcliffe values greater than 0.96, and bias ranging from -0.03 to 0.28 meters. The simulated peak stage in the Columbia River at Vancouver, Washington, for 1996 was 9.60 and 9.98 meters (31.5 and 32.7 feet) compared to the measured peak of 9.89 meters (32.5 feet). Future peak stage then was simulated with boundary conditions representing extreme but plausible future conditions at the inflow sites and the ocean boundary.The two calibrated models compared well in their simulations of extreme but plausible future conditions. For the 0-meter sea-level change scenario, the simulated peak stage in the Columbia River at Vancouver was 11.15 and 11.39 meters (36.6 and 37.4 feet); and for the 1-meter sea-level change scenario, the simulated peak stage in the Columbia River was 11.25 and 11.54 meters (36.9 and 37.9 feet). The total increase in stage as compared to the 1996 measured peak stage ranged from 1.26 to 1.65 meters (4.13 to 5.40 feet).
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».