MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1996014222 · doi:10.4296/cwrj3301073

Assessing the Effect of Climate Change on River Flow Using General Circulation Models and Hydrological Modelling – Application to the Chaudière River, Québec, Canada

2008· article· en· W1996014222 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Water Resources Journal / Revue canadienne des ressources hydriques · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrology and Watershed Management Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDownscalingEnvironmental scienceWatershedHydrology (agriculture)Surface runoffClimatologyClimate changeDeltaScale (ratio)StreamflowHydrological modellingDrainage basinMeteorologyPrecipitationGeographyComputer scienceGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dans le cadre d'une étude sur l'adaptation du territoire agricole au changement climatique (CC), cet article présente une évaluation de l'effet potentiel des CC sur le régime hydrologique du bassin versant de la rivière Chaudière (Québec, Canada). Après avoir inventorié les méthodes existantes pour intégrer les sorties des Modèles de Circulation Générale (MCG) dans les modèles hydrologiques, trois d'entre elles ont été sélectionnées : la méthode des deltas, la mise à l'échelle statistique ainsi qu'une méthode combinant les deux précédentes. Afin d'obtenir une large gamme de conditions futures possibles, plusieurs MCG ainsi que plusieurs scénarios d'émission de gaz à effet de serre et membres de simulations ont également été considérés. Le système de modélisation intégrée GIBSI, basé sur le modèle hydrologique distribué HYDROTEL, a été utilisé pour simuler les débits sur la période de référence (1970-1999) et sur la période future (2010-2039). Les résultats montrent une légère diminution de la lame d'eau annuelle avec les trois méthodes (en moyenne -5 %). Sur une base mensuelle, l'effet est plus hétérogène selon la méthode utilisée, avec le plus souvent une augmentation de la lame d'eau en hiver du fait de l'augmentation de la température et une diminution en été et durant l'automne. Selon la méthode de mise à l'échelle statistique, le débit de pointe printanier diminuerait également (-6,7 % en moyenne) tandis que le débit d'étiage estival ne serait pas affecté. Cette étude met en évidence la nécessité d'utiliser plusieurs sources d'information et plusieurs méthodes pour évaluer les effets potentiels des CC sur l'hydrologie des bassins versants.
\n
\n<h2>Abstract</h2>
\ns part of a wider study on the adaptation of agricultural land use to climate change (CC), this paper presents an assessment of possible future hydrological regimes of the Chaudière River watershed, Québec, Canada. We first present a review of the various methods used to integrate outputs of General Circulation Models (GCMs) into hydrological models that are applied at a local scale. Following this review, the delta method, statistical downscaling, and a combination of both methods were selected for this investigation. Data from different GCMs (in the case of the delta method) corresponding to different gas emission scenarios and simulation members were also considered to provide a range of possible future conditions. We used the integrated modelling system GIBSI, which is based on the distributed hydrological model HYDROTEL, to simulate streamflows for a reference period (1970-1999) and a short-term future period (2010-2039). For all three methods, results show a slight decrease in annual runoff (-5% on average). On a monthly scale, the effect is more heterogeneous depending on the method used, showing, in most cases, an increase in water discharge in the winter due to higher temperature and a decrease during the summer and fall. When using statistical downscaling, spring peak flow decreased slightly (-6.7% on average) while summer base flow remained unchanged. This study highlights the importance of using different methods and different sources of data in the assessment of potential CC effects on watershed hydrology.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
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 score0.100
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.189 · 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