Identification of changes in floods and flood regimes in Canada using a peaks over threshold approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Recent flood events in Canada have led to speculation that changes in flood behaviour are occurring; these changes have often been attributed to climate change. This paper examines flood data for a collection of 132 gauging stations in Canada. All of these watersheds are part of the Canadian Reference Hydrometric Basin Network (RHBN), a group of gauging stations specifically assembled to assist in the identification of the impacts of climate change. The RHBN stations are considered to have good quality data and were screened to avoid the influences of regulation, diversions, or land use change. Daily flow data for each watershed are used to derive a peaks over threshold (POT) dataset. Several measures of flood behaviour are examined based on the POT data, which afford a more in‐depth analysis of flood behaviour than can be obtained using annual maxima data. Analysis is conducted for four time periods ranging from 50 to 80 years in duration; the latter period results in a much smaller number of watersheds that have data for the period. The changes in flood responses of the watersheds are summarized by grouping the watersheds by size (small, medium, and large) and also by hydrologic regime (nival, mixed, and pluvial). The results provide important insights into the nature of the changes that are occurring in flood regimes of Canadian rivers, which include more flood exceedances, reduced maximum flood exceedance magnitudes for snowmelt events, and earlier flood events. Copyright © 2016 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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".