Flood processes in Canada: Regional and special aspects
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cet article dresse un portrait des principaux processus essentiels à la génération des crues au Canada et conséquemment, donne le ton pour les autres articles inclus dans ce numéro spécial, dans lesquels on traite d’événements spécifiques et des processus qui en font la genèse. Le contexte historique des crues au Canada est résumé sous forme régionale, avec une description des processus spécifiques à chaque région, qui incluent entre autre les crues nivales, celles causées par des précipitations liquides sur couvert de neige et les crues pluviales. Certains processus jugés particulièrement pertinents ou qui ont été moins étudiés au Canada sont décrits : eau souterraine, surcotes associées aux tempêtes, embâcles de glace et les crues en milieu urbain. La problématique des changements climatiques au Canada est aussi examinée et des pistes de recherche liée aux processus causant les crues sont identifiées.<br /><br />This paper provides an overview of the key processes that generate floods in Canada, and a context for the other papers in this special issue ? papers that provide detailed examinations of specific floods and flood-generating processes. The historical context of flooding in Canada is outlined, followed by a summary of regional aspects of floods in Canada and descriptions of the processes that generate floods in these regions, including floods generated by snowmelt, rain-on-snow and rainfall. Some flood processes that are particularly relevant, or which have been less well studied in Canada, are described: groundwater, storm surges, ice-jams and urban flooding. The issue of climate change-related trends in floods in Canada is examined, and suggested research needs regarding flood-generating processes are identified.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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 it