Prediction of Streamflow Regime and Annual Runoff for Ungauged Basins Using a Distributed Monthly Water Balance Model<sup>1</sup>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Moore, R.D. (Dan), J.W. Trubilowicz, and J.M. Buttle, 2011. Prediction of Streamflow Regime and Annual Runoff for Ungauged Basins Using a Distributed Monthly Water Balance Model. Journal of the American Water Resources Association (JAWRA) 48(1): 32‐42. DOI: 10.1111/j.1752‐1688.2011.00595.x Abstract: Prediction of streamflow in ungauged basins is a global challenge, but is particularly an issue in physiographically complex regions like British Columbia (BC), Canada. The objective of this study was to assess the accuracy of a simple water balance model that can be run using existing spatial datasets. The model was developed by modifying an existing monthly water balance model to account for interception loss from forest canopy, glacier melt, and evaporation from lakes. The model was run using monthly climate normals from the ClimateBC application, which have a horizontal resolution of 400 m. Each ClimateBC grid cell was classified as forest, open land, glacier or water surface based on provincial scale digital maps of biogeoclimatic zones, glaciers, and water. The output was monthly mean runoff from each grid cell. These values were integrated within the catchment boundaries for streams gauged by the Water Survey of Canada. Annual runoff was predicted with modest accuracy: after updating the predicted runoff by interpolating errors from neighboring gauged streams, the mean absolute error was 25.4% of the gauged value, and 52% of the streams had errors less than 20%. However, the model appears to be quite robust in distinguishing between pluvial, hybrid, and melt‐dominated hydroclimatic regimes, and therefore has promise as a tool for catchment classification.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".