MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2521173631 · doi:10.3133/sir20165118

Magnitude, frequency, and trends of floods at gaged and ungaged sites in Washington, based on data through water year 2014

2016· article· en· W2521173631 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Mark C. Mastin, Christopher P. Konrad, Andrea G. Veilleux, Alison E. Tecca

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific investigations report · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrology and Watershed Management Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeological surveyMagnitude (astronomy)Drainage basinHydrology (agriculture)Environmental scienceDistribution (mathematics)GeographyPhysical geographyGeologyCartographyMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

First posted September 20, 2016 Revised November 1, 2017 For additional information, contact: Director, Washington Water Science Center U.S. Geological Survey 934 Broadway, Suite 300 Tacoma, Washington 98402 An investigation into the magnitude and frequency of floods in Washington State computed the annual exceedance probability (AEP) statistics for 648 U.S. Geological Survey unregulated streamgages in and near the borders of Washington using the recorded annual peak flows through water year 2014. This is an updated report from a previous report published in 1998 that used annual peak flows through the water year 1996. New in this report, a regional skew coefficient was developed for the Pacific Northwest region that includes areas in Oregon, Washington, Idaho and western Montana within the Columbia River drainage basin south of the United States-Canada border, the coastal areas of Oregon and western Washington, and watersheds draining into Puget Sound, Washington. The skew coefficient is an important term in the Log Pearson Type III equation used to define the distribution of the log-transformed annual peaks. The Expected Moments Algorithm was used to fit historical and censored peak-flow data to the log Pearson Type III distribution. A Multiple Grubb-Beck test was employed to censor low outliers of annual peak flows to improve on the frequency distribution. This investigation also includes a section on observed trends in annual peak flows that showed significant trends (p-value < 0.05) in 21 of 83 long-term sites, but with small magnitude Kendall tau values suggesting a limited monotonic trend in the time series of annual peaks. Most of the sites with a significant trend in western Washington were positive and all the sites with significant trends (three sites) in eastern Washington were negative.Multivariate regression analysis with measured basin characteristics and the AEP statistics at long-term, unregulated, and un-urbanized (defined as drainage basins with less than 5 percent impervious land cover for this investigation) streamgages within Washington and some in Idaho and Oregon that are near the Washington border was used to develop equations to estimate AEP statistics at ungaged basins. Washington was divided into four regions to improve the accuracy of the regression equations; a set of equations for eight selected AEPs and for each region were constructed. Selected AEP statistics included the annual peak flows that equaled or exceeded 50, 20, 10, 4, 2, 1, 0.5 and 0.2 percent of the time equivalent to peak flows for peaks with a 2-, 5-, 10-, 25-, 50-, 100-, 200-, and 500-year recurrence intervals, respectively. Annual precipitation and drainage area were the significant basin characteristics in the regression equations for all four regression regions in Washington and forest cover was significant for the two regression regions in eastern Washington. Average standard error of prediction for the regional regression equations ranged from 70.19 to 125.72 percent for Regression Regions 1 and 2 on the eastern side of the Cascade Mountains and from 43.22 to 58.04 percent for Regression Regions 3 and 4 on the western side of the Cascade Mountains. The pseudo coefficient of determination (where a value of 100 signifies a perfect regression model) ranged from 68.39 to 90.68 for Regression Regions 1 and 2, and 92.35 to 95.44 for Regions 3 and 4.The calculated AEP statistics for the streamgages and the regional regression equations are expected to be incorporated into StreamStats after the publication of this report. StreamStats is the interactive Web-based map tool created by the U.S. Geological Survey to allow the user to choose a streamgage and obtain published statistics or choose ungaged locations where the program automatically applies the regional regression equations and computes the estimates of the AEP statistics.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.768

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.034
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.223 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations23
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific investigations reportSame topicHydrology and Watershed Management StudiesFrench-language works237,207