Development of the MESH modelling system for hydrological ensemble forecasting of the Laurentian Great Lakes at the regional scale
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. Environment Canada has been developing a community environmental modelling system (Modélisation Environmentale Communautaire – MEC), which is designed to facilitate coupling between models focusing on different components of the earth system. The ultimate objective of MEC is to use the coupled models to produce operational forecasts. MESH (MEC – Surface and Hydrology), a configuration of MEC currently under development, is specialized for coupled land-surface and hydrological models. To determine the specific requirements for MESH, its different components were implemented on the Laurentian Great Lakes watershed, situated on the Canada-US border. This experiment showed that MESH can help us better understand the behaviour of different land-surface models, test different schemes for producing ensemble streamflow forecasts, and provide a means of sharing the data, the models and the results with collaborators and end-users. This modelling framework is at the heart of a testbed proposal for the Hydrologic Ensemble Prediction Experiment (HEPEX) which should allow us to make use of the North American Ensemble Forecasting System (NAEFS) to improve streamflow forecasts of the Great Lakes tributaries, and demonstrate how MESH can contribute to a Community Hydrologic Prediction System (CHPS).
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".