Bayesian conditioning of a rainfall‐runoff model for predicting flows in ungauged catchments and under land use changes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A novel method is presented for conditioning rainfall‐runoff models for ungauged catchment and land use impact applications. The method conditions the model on information from multiple regionalized response indices using a formal Bayesian approach. Two indices that hold information about soil type and land use effects are the base flow index from the Hydrology of Soil Type (HOST) classification and curve number from the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Soil Conservation Service soil and land use classification. These indices are used to constrain a five‐parameter probability distributed moisture model for subcatchments of the Wye (grazed grassland) and Severn (mainly afforested) catchments in the United Kingdom. The base flow index and curve number constrain only two of the five model parameters, indicating that ideally, other sources of information would be sought. Nevertheless, the procedure significantly reduces the prior uncertainty in runoff prediction and gives predictions close to those of the calibrated models. For the case study, the introduction of the curve number in addition to the base flow index has only a small effect on model performance and uncertainty; however, it allows a distinction between the effects of soil type and land management for the purpose of scenario analysis. The principal assumptions used in the method are the applicability of the curve number classification system and its mapping to UK soil types and the likelihood function used for Bayesian conditioning.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".