ASSESSMENT OF POSSIBLE IMPACTS OF CLIMATE CHANGE IN AN URBAN CATCHMENT<sup>1</sup>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT: Stationarity of rainfall statistical parameters is a fundamental assumption in hydraulic infrastructure design that may not be valid in an era of changing climate. This study develops a framework for examining the potential impacts of future increases in short duration rainfall intensity on urban infrastructure and natural ecosystems of small watersheds and demonstrates this approach for the Mission/Wagg Creek watershed in British Columbia, Canada. Nonstationarities in rainfall records are first analyzed with linear regression analysis, and the detected trends are extrapolated to build potential future rainfall scenarios. The Storm Water Management Model (SWMM) is used to analyze the effects of increased rainfall intensity on design peak flows and to assess future drainage infrastructure capacity according to the derived scenarios. While the framework provided herein may be modified for cases in which more complex distributions for rainfall intensity are needed and more sophisticated stormwater management models are available, linear regressions and SWMM are commonly used in practice and are applicable for the Mission/Wagg Creek watershed. Potential future impacts on stream health are assessed using methods based on equivalent total impervious area. In terms of impacts on the drainage infrastructure, the results of this study indicate that increases in short duration rainfall intensity may be expected in the future but that they would not create severe impacts in the Mission/Wagg Creek system. The equivalent levels of imperviousness, however, suggest that the impacts on stream health could be far more damaging.
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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".