MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3137404772 · doi:10.2166/wcc.2021.302

Application of the HBV model for the future projections of water levels using dynamically downscaled global climate model data

2021· article· en· W3137404772 on OpenAlexafffund
Lia Pervin, Thian Yew Gan, H. Scheepers, Md Saiful Islam

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Water and Climate Change · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicArctic and Antarctic ice dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersTransport Canada
KeywordsWeather Research and Forecasting ModelStreamflowEnvironmental scienceClimatologyClimate changeClimate modelArcticMeteorologyHydrology (agriculture)GeographyDrainage basinGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The Hydrologiska Byråns Vattenbalansavdelning (HBV) model was used to project the future water levels of the Mackenzie River at selected stations. The Weather Research and Forecasting (WRF) model was utilized to dynamically downscale the Global Climate Model data. The calibrated and validated HBV model was run with the WRF downscaled CanESM2 data and with the PCIC data for the historical (1979–2005) period, and then compared with the observed flow data at the Fort Simpson station and the Arctic Red River station. The simulated streamflow showed a good correlation with the observed streamflow (R2 value was around 0.85). The HBV model was then forced with the bias-corrected WRF downscaled daily rainfall and temperature data driven by the CanESM2 RCP 4.5 and RCP 8.5 climate scenarios to simulate the future streamflow for the 2041–2070 period. Rating curves were used to convert streamflow to water levels. At the Fort Simpson station, mean flow was projected to decrease by about 5% under both RCP 4.5 and RCP 8.5 scenarios, whereas the peak flow was likely to reduce by about 12 and 9% for RCP 4.5 and RCP 8.5 scenarios, respectively, in the 2050s. The projected lower water levels could affect the navigability and the northern ferry operations of the Mackenzie River.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.652
Threshold uncertainty score0.183

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.068
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.215 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations12
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Water and Climate ChangeSame topicArctic and Antarctic ice dynamicsFrench-language works237,207