MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3157387754 · doi:10.1139/er-2020-0108

Modelling climatic impacts on ice-jam floods: a review of current models, modelling capabilities, challenges, and future prospects

2021· review· en· W3157387754 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Apurba Das, Karl‐Erich Lindenschmidt

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Reviews · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicArctic and Antarctic ice dynamics
Canadian institutionsGlobal Institute for Water SecurityUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClimate changeEnvironmental scienceFlooding (psychology)Current (fluid)StreamflowClimatologyCryosphereClimate modelSea iceGeologyDrainage basinGeographyOceanography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

River ice is an important hydraulic and hydrological component of many rivers in the high northern latitudes of the world. It controls the hydraulic characteristics of streamflow, affects the geomorphology of channels, and can cause flooding due to ice-jam formation during ice-cover freeze-up and breakup periods. In recent decades, climate change has considerably altered ice regimes, affecting the severity of ice-jam flooding. Although many approaches have been developed to model river ice regimes and the severity of ice-jam flooding, appropriate methods that account for the impacts of future climate on ice-jam flooding have not been well established. Therefore, the main goals of this study are to review current knowledge regarding climate change impacts on river ice processes and to assess current modelling capabilities to determine the severity of ice jams under future climatic conditions. Finally, a conceptual river ice-jam modelling approach is presented for incorporating climate change impacts on ice jams.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.084
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.192 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations15
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental ReviewsSame topicArctic and Antarctic ice dynamicsFrench-language works237,207