Hydrological Modelling of River Flow Forecasting in Cold Regions and Its Application over the Athabasca River
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Floods are disasters that represent a growing threat to the communities living close to rivers. To maximize community resilience, the main objective was to formulate a transferable framework for river flow forecasting in cold and poorly gauged/ungauged regions. First, the literature was reviewed, summarizing the recent findings in river flow forecasting in these regions. Here, hydrological processes greatly vary seasonally and annually, translating into increased model uncertainty. Regionalization, spatial calibration, and other methods were implemented into process-based and empirical models. Although process-based models provided a wide understanding of a watershed’s hydrology, they were often complex and computationally demanding. Empirical models produced fewer calibration parameters although generated biased results when insufficient descriptors were available. The results from this review highlighted some efforts necessary to improve river flow forecasting, including: coping with limited data; providing user-friendly interfaces; advancing model structure; developing a universal method for transferring parameters; standardizing calibration and validation; integrating process-based and empirical models. In addition, a machine learning-based model was developed using a single-input sequential adaptive neuro-fuzzy inference system (ANFIS) in the Athabasca River Basin (ARB) in Alberta, Canada. After estimating the optimal lead time between four hydrometric stations, data measured near the source were used to compute flows near the mouth, over approximately 1,000 km. This technique was compared to nonsequential and multi-input ANFIS, which used data from all the four hydrometric stations. The results showed that sequential ANFIS could accurately predict flows (r2 = 0.99, Nash–Sutcliffe = 0.98) with a longer lead time (6 days) using a single input. Finally, a novel simplistic method for short-term (6 days) forecasting called Flow Difference Model (FDM) was developed and compared against existing hydrological models (i.e., Regression Models (RM) and Base Difference Model (BDM)), to demonstrate that simplistic modelling can achieve acceptable accuracy. The results showed that the FDM outperformed the other models (Nash–Sutcliffe = 0.95) using limited inputs and calibration parameters. Moreover, the FDM had similar performance to machine learning techniques, demonstrating the forecasting capability of simplistic methods. These findings could be utilized towards flood prevention and planning, operations, maintenance, and administration of water resource systems.
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 | 0,000 | 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 | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| 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 ».