Simulated and observed 2010 flood-water elevations in selected river reaches in the Moshassuck and Woonasquatucket River Basins, Rhode Island
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Heavy persistent rains from late February through March 2010 caused severe flooding and set, or nearly set, peaks of record for streamflows and water levels at many long-term U.S. Geological Survey streamgages in Rhode Island. In response to this flood, hydraulic models were updated for selected reaches covering about 33 river miles in Moshassuck and Woonasquatucket River Basins from the most recent approved Federal Emergency Management Agency flood insurance study (FIS) to simulate water-surface elevations (WSEs) from specified flows and boundary conditions. Reaches modeled include the main stem of the Moshassuck River and its main tributary, the West River, and three tributaries to the West River—Upper Canada Brook, Lincoln Downs Brook, and East Branch West River; and the main stem of the Woonasquatucket River. All the hydraulic models were updated to Hydrologic Engineering Center-River Analysis System (HEC-RAS) version 4.1.0 and incorporate new field-survey data at structures, high-resolution land-surface elevation data, and flood flows from a related study. The models were used to simulate steady-state WSEs at the 1- and 2-percent annual exceedance probability (AEP) flows, which is the estimated AEP of the 2010 flood in the Moshassuck River Basin and the Woonasquatucket River, respectively. The simulated WSEs were compared to the high-water mark (HWM) elevation data obtained in these basins in a related study following the March–April 2010 flood, which included 18 HWMs along the Moshassuck River and 45 HWMs along the Woonasquatucket River. Differences between the 2010 HWMs and the simulated 2- and 1-percent AEP WSEs from the FISs and the updated models developed in this study varied along the reach. Most differences could be attributed to the magnitude of the 2- and 1-percent AEP flows used in the FIS and updated model flows. Overall, the updated model and the FIS WSEs were not appreciably different when compared to the observed 2010 HWMs along the Woonasquatucket and Moshassuck Rivers.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".