MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2011857131 · doi:10.1002/hyp.8117

Multivariate analysis of flood characteristics in a climate change context of the watershed of the Baskatong reservoir, Province of Québec, Canada

2011· article· en· W2011857131 on OpenAlexaffabout
M.‐A. Ben Aissia, Fateh Chebana, Taha B. M. J. Ouarda, Lal Bahadur Roy, G. Desrochers, I. Chartier, Élaine Robichaud

Bibliographic record

VenueHydrological Processes · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrology and Watershed Management Studies
Canadian institutionsHydro-QuébecInstitut National de la Recherche Scientifique
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFlood mythWatershedContext (archaeology)Multivariate statisticsClimate changeEnvironmental science100-year floodHydrology (agriculture)Multivariate analysisFlood forecastingClimatologyStreamflowPhysical geographyGeographyDrainage basinGeologyStatisticsMathematicsCartographyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The analysis of the impact of climate change (CC) on flood peaks has been the subject of several studies. However, a flood is characterized not only by its peak, but also by other characteristics such as its volume and duration. Little effort has been directed towards the study of the impact of CC on these characteristics. The aim of the present study is to evaluate and compare flood characteristics in a CC context, in the watershed of the Baskatong reservoir (Province of Québec, Canada). Comparisons are based on observed flow data and simulated flow series obtained from hydrological models using meteorological data from a regional climate model for a reference period (1971–2000) and a future period (2041–2070). To this end, two hydrological models HSAMI and HYDROTEL are considered. Correlations, stationarity, change‐points, and the multivariate behaviour of flood series were studied. The results show that, at various levels, all flood characteristics could be affected by CC. Copyright © 2011 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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.347
Threshold uncertainty score0.521

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.213
Teacher spread0.184 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations49
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHydrological ProcessesSame topicHydrology and Watershed Management StudiesFrench-language works237,207