The Influence of the Pacific Decadal Oscillation on Annual Floods in the Rivers of Western Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract We analyzed annual peak flow series from 127 naturally flowing or naturalized streamflow gauges across western Canada to examine the impact of the Pacific Decadal Oscillation (PDO) on annual flood risk, which has been previously unexamined in detail. Using Spearman's rank correlation ρ and permutation tests on quantile‐quantile plots, we show that higher magnitude floods are more likely during the negative phase of the PDO than during the positive phase (shown at 38% of the stations by Spearman's rank correlations and at 51% of the stations according to the permutation tests). Flood frequency analysis (FFA) stratified according to PDO phase suggests that higher magnitude floods may also occur more frequently during the negative PDO phase than during the positive phase. Our results hold throughout much of this region, with the upper Fraser River Basin, the Columbia River Basin, and the North Saskatchewan River Basin particularly subject to this effect. Our results add to other researchers' work questioning the wholesale validity of the key assumption in FFA that the annual peak flow series at a site is independently and identically distributed. Hence, knowledge of large‐scale climate state should be considered prior to the design and construction of infrastructure.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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 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".