Climate Change Impacts and Uncertainties on Spring Flooding of Lake Champlain and the Richelieu River
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The source of the Richelieu River is Lake Champlain, located between the states of New York, Vermont, and Québec. In 2011, the lake and the Richelieu River reached historical flood levels, raising questions about the influence of climate change on the watershed. The objectives of this work are to model the hydrology of the watershed, construct a reservoir model for the lake and to analyze flooding trends using climate simulations. The basin was modeled using the HSAMI lumped conceptual model from Hydro‐Québec with a semi‐distributed approach in order to estimate the inflows into Lake Champlain. The discharge at the Richelieu River was computed by using a mass balance equation between the inputs and outputs of Lake Champlain. Future trends were estimated over the 2041‐2070 and 2071‐2100 periods using a large number of outputs from general circulation models and regional climate models downscaled with constant scaling and daily translation methods. While there is a certain amount of uncertainty as to future trends, there is a decreasing tendency in the magnitude of the mean spring flood. A flood frequency analysis showed most climate projections indicate the severity of most extreme spring floods may be reduced over the two future periods although results are subject to a much larger uncertainty than for the mean spring flood. On the other hand, results indicate summer‐fall extreme events such as caused by hurricane Irene in August 2011 may become more frequent in the future.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".