Hydrologic evaluation of spatially disaggregated global ensemble rainfall forecasts
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract A statistic–stochastic multi‐fractal downscaling technique was evaluated from a hydrologic point of view. Ensemble hydrologic forecasts with a time step of 3 h were performed for original and disaggregated ensemble rainfall forecasts issued by the Canadian Global Ensemble Prediction System in its 2009 operational version. This hydro‐meteorological operational forecasting chain was conducted using the hydrological model SWMM5. The model was implemented on a small 6‐km 2 urban catchment located in the Québec City region. The hydrological evaluation was based on the comparison of forecasted flows to the observed ones, calculating several deterministic and probabilistic scores, and drawing rank histograms and reliability diagrams. Disaggregated products led to a better representation of the ensemble members' dispersion. This disaggregation technique represents an interesting way of bridging the gap between the meteorological models' resolution and the high degree of spatial precision sometimes required by hydrological models in their precipitation representation. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".