MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2071201618 · doi:10.1002/hyp.1355

Numerical modelling of ice‐jam flooding on the Peace–Athabasca delta

2003· article· en· W2071201618 on OpenAlexaffabout
Spyros Beltaos

Bibliographic record

VenueHydrological Processes · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicArctic and Antarctic ice dynamics
Canadian institutionsImpactEnvironment and Climate Change Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTributaryEnvironmental scienceHydrology (agriculture)Flooding (psychology)BreakupDeltaPrecipitationGeologyMeteorologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Ice jamming during the spring breakup of the ice cover in the lower reaches of the Peace River has been identified as the main agent of flooding and replenishment of the Peace–Athabasca delta (PAD) ecosystems. The relative rarity of major ice jams in the lower Peace River following construction of the Bennett Dam has resulted in serious habitat degradation and risk to local ecology, and concern has been raised over potential climate change impacts. This issue is under active study that encompasses use of various types of model, field data collection, and analysis of archived records. An important component of the study aims at determination of threshold flows that can result in significant flooding when a jam is in place in the PAD reach of the Peace. This question is investigated by means of RIVJAM, a numerical model that computes the water surface and thickness profiles of a jam in a given river reach. First, the model is calibrated using field data obtained during the 1996 and 1997 ice‐jam floods. Calibration coefficients are shown to be the same for both events and consistent with default values determined from previous applications in other rivers. A by‐product of the calibration process is the quantification of the flow reversals occurring under high‐stage conditions in the three major tributaries of the lower Peace. Next, the model is applied with increasing flow values and the resulting water surface profiles are compared with bank elevations. These comparisons indicate that an incoming flow of at least 4000 m 3 s −1 is required to produce significant flooding of the delta. The calibrated model can also be used to examine the efficacy of controlled water releases at the Bennett Dam as a means of enhancing flooding potential. Copyright © 2003 Crown in the right of Canada. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.083
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.041
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.175 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations55
Published2003
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHydrological ProcessesSame topicArctic and Antarctic ice dynamicsFrench-language works237,207