Verification of ECMWF System 4 for seasonal hydrological forecasting in a northern climate
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. Hydropower production requires optimal dam and reservoir management to prevent flooding damage and avoid operation losses. In a northern climate, where spring freshet constitutes the main inflow volume, seasonal forecasts can help to establish a yearly strategy. Long-term hydrological forecasts often rely on past observations of streamflow or meteorological data. Another alternative is to use ensemble meteorological forecasts produced by climate models. In this paper, those produced by the ECMWF (European Centre for Medium-Range Forecast) System 4 are examined and bias is characterized. Bias correction, through the linear scaling method, improves the performance of the raw ensemble meteorological forecasts in terms of continuous ranked probability score (CRPS). Then, three seasonal ensemble hydrological forecasting systems are compared: (1) the climatology of simulated streamflow, (2) the ensemble hydrological forecasts based on climatology (ESP) and (3) the hydrological forecasts based on bias-corrected ensemble meteorological forecasts from System 4 (corr-DSP). Simulated streamflow computed using observed meteorological data is used as benchmark. Accounting for initial conditions is valuable even for long-term forecasts. ESP and corr-DSP both outperform the climatology of simulated streamflow for lead times from 1 to 5 months depending on the season and watershed. Integrating information about future meteorological conditions also improves monthly volume forecasts. For the 1-month lead time, a gain exists for almost all watersheds during winter, summer and fall. However, volume forecasts performance for spring varies from one watershed to another. For most of them, the performance is close to the performance of ESP. For longer lead times, the CRPS skill score is mostly in favour of ESP, even if for many watersheds, ESP and corr-DSP have comparable skill. Corr-DSP appears quite reliable but, in some cases, under-dispersion or bias is observed. A more complex bias-correction method should be further investigated to remedy this weakness and take more advantage of the ensemble forecasts produced by the climate model. Overall, in this study, bias-corrected ensemble meteorological forecasts appear to be an interesting source of information for hydrological forecasting for lead times up to 1 month. They could also complement ESP for longer lead times.
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 | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".