New Sensitivity Indices of a 2D Flood Inundation Model Using Gauss Quadrature Sampling
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A new method for sensitivity analysis of water depths is presented based on a two-dimensional hydraulic model as a convenient and cost-effective alternative to Monte Carlo simulations. The method involves perturbation of the probability distribution of input variables. A relative sensitivity index is calculated for each variable, using the Gauss quadrature sampling, thus limiting the number of runs of the hydraulic model. The variable-related highest variation of the expected water depths is considered to be the most influential. The proposed method proved particularly efficient, requiring less information to describe model inputs and fewer model executions to calculate the sensitivity index. It was tested over a 45 km long reach of the Richelieu River, Canada. A 2D hydraulic model was used to solve the shallow water equations (SWE). Three input variables were considered: Flow rate, Manning’s coefficient, and topography of a shoal within the considered reach. Four flow scenarios were simulated with discharge rates of 759, 824, 936, and 1113 m 3 / s . The results show that the predicted water depths were most sensitive to the topography of the shoal, whereas the sensitivity indices of Manning’s coefficient and the flow rate were comparatively lower. These results are important for making better hydraulic models, taking into account the sensitivity analysis.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".