Changes in cold region flood regimes inferred from long‐record reference gauging stations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Variability and nonstationarity in flood regimes of cold regions are examined using data from hydrometric reference streamflow gauging stations from 27 natural watersheds in Canada and adjacent areas of the United States. Choosing stations from reference networks with nearly 100 years of data allows for the investigation of changes that span several phases of some of the atmospheric drivers that may influence flood behavior. The reference hydrologic networks include only stations considered to have good quality data and were screened to avoid the influences of regulation, diversions, or land use change. Changes and variations in flood regimes are complex and require a multifaceted approach to properly characterize the types of changes that have occurred and are likely to occur in the future. Peaks over threshold (POT) data are extracted from daily flow data for each watershed, and changes to the magnitude, timing, frequency, volume, and duration of threshold exceedences are investigated. Seasonal statistics are used to explore changes in the nature of the flood regime based on changes in the timing of flood threshold exceedences. A variety of measures are developed to infer flood regime shifts including from a nival regime to a mixed regime and a mixed regime to a more pluvial‐dominated regime. The flood regime at many of the watersheds demonstrates increased prominence of rainfall floods and decreased prevalence of snowmelt contributions to flood responses. While some individual stations show a relationship between flood variables and climate indices, these relationships are generally weak.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".