MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2016679938 · doi:10.1139/l04-011

Prévision hydrologique distribuée pour la gestion des barrages publics du Québec

2004· article· en· W2016679938 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Richard Turcotte, Pierre J. Lacombe, Corrine Dimnik, Jean‐Pierre Villeneuve

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Civil Engineering · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrology and Watershed Management Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFlood forecastingFlood mythEnvironmental scienceHydrology (agriculture)MeteorologyCalibrationUpstream (networking)Hydrological modellingComputer scienceOperations researchGeologyGeographyClimatologyEngineeringGeotechnical engineeringTelecommunicationsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The development of a flow forecasting system for public dam management in southern Quebec is presented. The system is based on distributed hydrological models using 3-h time steps to correctly perform short-term forecasts on small watersheds, located upstream of these dams, with quick hydrological responses. The contribution of models in the complete process of forecast evaluation is also studied. A numerical application, using the flood of the Chaudière river in July 2001, illustrated that distributed models with short time steps are needed despite the added complexity in the installation, calibration, and operation of the forecasting system. Also, the analysis of flow forecasted for the Spring 2003 flood shows that interpretation of model runs can lead the operational forecaster to better forecasting of results and can be improved by the use of distributed models.Key words: hydrology, flow forecast, distributed hydrological model, flood.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.054
Threshold uncertainty score0.110

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.002

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.160
Teacher spread0.155 · 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

Citations41
Published2004
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Civil EngineeringSame topicHydrology and Watershed Management StudiesFrench-language works237,207