System dynamics model for predicting floods from snowmelt in North American prairie watersheds
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This study uses a system dynamics approach to explore hydrological processes in the geographic locations where the main contribution to flooding is coming from the snowmelt. Temperature is identified as a critical factor that affects watershed hydrological processes. Based on the dynamic processes of the hydrologic cycle occurring in a watershed, the feedback relationships linking the watershed structure, as well as the climate factors, to the streamflow generation were identified prior to the development of a system dynamics model. The model is used to simulate flood patterns generated by snowmelt under temperature change in the spring. Model structure captures a vertical water balance using five tanks representing snow, interception, surface, subsurface and groundwater storage. Calibration and verification results show that temperature change and snowmelt play a key role in flood generation. Results indicate that simulated values match observed data very well. The goodness‐of‐fit between simulated and observed peak flow data is measured using coefficient of efficiency, coefficient of determination and square of the residual mass curve coefficient. For the Assiniboine River all three measures were in the interval between 0·92 and 0·96 and for the Red River between 0·89 and 0·97. The model is capable of capturing the essential dynamics of streamflow formation. Model input requires a set of initial values for all state variables and the time series of daily temperature and precipitation information. Data from the Red River Basin, shared by Canada and the USA, are used in the model development and testing. Copyright © 2002 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 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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".