Simplifying a hydrological ensemble prediction system with a backward greedy selection of members – Part 2: Generalization in time and space
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. An uncertainty cascade model applied to stream flow forecasting seeks to evaluate the different sources of uncertainty of the complex rainfall-runoff process. The current trend focuses on the combination of Meteorological Ensemble Prediction Systems (MEPS) and hydrological model(s). However, the number of members of such a HEPS may rapidly increase to a level that may not be operationally sustainable. This paper evaluates the generalization ability of a simplification scheme of a 800-member HEPS formed by the combination of 16 lumped rainfall-runoff models with the 50 perturbed members from the European Centre for Medium-range Weather Forecasts (ECMWF) EPS. Tests are made at two levels. At the local level, the transferability of the 9th day hydrological member selection for the other 8 forecast horizons exhibits an 82% success rate. The other evaluation is made at the regional or cluster level, the transferability from one catchment to another from within a cluster of watersheds also leads to a good performance (85% success rate), especially for forecast time horizons above 3 days and when the basins that formed the cluster presented themselves a good performance on an individual basis. Diversity, defined as hydrological model complementarity addressing different aspects of a forecast, was identified as the critical factor for proper selection applications.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".