Optimization of dam's spillway design under climate change conditions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The present research introduces a model to find the best shape of a dam's spillway under climate change impacts, considering a benchmark problem (i.e., Ute Dam's labyrinth spillway in the Canadian River watershed, New Mexico, USA). A spillway design is based not only on historical data but also on the future hydrologic events. Climate variables were predicted for the years 2021–2050 based on three representative concentration pathway (RCP2.6, RCP4.5, and RCP8.5) scenarios of the general circulation model from the fifth phase of the coupled model intercomparison project (CMIP5) using the statistical downscaling model. Streamflow at the USGS 07226500 streamgage was simulated by a rainfall–runoff model with predicted data. Instantaneous peak flow was estimated using an empirical method. Flood frequency analysis was used for the estimation of the design flood. The shuffled frog-leaping algorithm (SFLA) is used to optimize a labyrinth spillway design and its results were compared with two other nature-inspired algorithms: invasive weed optimization (IWO) and cuckoo search (CS). The spillway was optimized once with the actual design flood (16,143 m3/s) and again with the design flood under climate change (12,250 m3/s). Results revealed that optimization with realistic design flood reduced the concrete volume of the spillway by 37% and under climate change by 43% using the SFLA.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".