Probabilistic Flood Forecasting Using Hydrologic Uncertainty Processor with Ensemble Weather Forecasts
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recent advances in the field of flood forecasting have shown increased interests in probabilistic forecasting as it provides not only the point forecast but also the assessment of associated uncertainty. Here, an investigation of a hydrologic uncertainty processor (HUP) as a postprocessor of ensemble forecasts to generate probabilistic flood forecasts is presented. The main purpose is to quantify dominant uncertainties and enhance flood forecast reliability. HUP is based on Bayes’s theorem and designed to capture hydrologic uncertainty. Ensemble forecasts are forced by ensemble weather forecasts from the Global Ensemble Prediction System (GEPS) that are inherently uncertain, and the input uncertainty propagates through the model chain and integrates with hydrologic uncertainty in HUP. The bias of GEPS was removed using multivariate bias correction, and several scenarios were developed by different combinations of GEPS with HUP. The performance of different forecast horizons for these scenarios was compared using multifaceted evaluation metrics. Results show that HUP is able to improve the performance for both short- and medium-range forecasts; the improvement is significant for short lead times and becomes less obvious with increasing lead time. Overall, the performances for short-range forecasts when using HUP are promising, and the most satisfactory result for the short range is obtained by applying bias correction to each ensemble member plus applying the HUP postprocessor.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".