MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1002170330

Climate Change Implications for the Operation of Called Upon Flood Control in the Columbia River Basin

2014· article· en· W1002170330 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jingyao Yuan

Bibliographic record

VenueSummit (Simon Fraser University) · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrology and Watershed Management Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFlood mythFlood controlClimate changeHydrology (agriculture)GeographyEnvironmental scienceWater resource managementGeologyArchaeologyOceanography
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Negotiated over 60 years ago and ratified in 1964, the Columbia River Treaty (CRT or "the Treaty"), is often looked to as the standard for cross-jurisdictional water management.A crucial aspect of the Treaty is the governance of water flows to minimize downstream flooding.Climate change directly impacts the hydrology of the Columbia River, which has implications for activities such as power generation and flood control management.The Treaty needs to be modernized to incorporate the effects of climate change.Current discussions between Canada and the United States over the Treaty provide an opportunity to incorporate potential impacts of climate change on measures Canada could be asked to take to reduce downstream flooding.This study looks at the effects of climate change on flood risk within the Columbia River Basin and analyzes the costs and benefits associated with the operation of a provision in the current treaty known as 'Called Upon' flood control.This study then presents the information that may be helpful for the Canadian Entity to frame negotiation options given the potential impacts of climate change.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.840
Threshold uncertainty score0.322

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.003
Scholarly communication0.0040.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.206
Teacher spread0.192 · 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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSummit (Simon Fraser University)Same topicHydrology and Watershed Management StudiesFrench-language works237,207