MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Climate Change and Rainfall Intensity–Duration–Frequency Curves: Overview of Science and Guidelines for Adaptation

2021· article· en· W3193166135 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Hydrologic Engineering · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicClimate variability and models
Canadian institutionsEnvironment and Climate Change CanadaÉcole de Technologie Supérieure
FundersAgence Nationale de la Recherche
KeywordsEnvironmental scienceClimatologyClimate changeReturn periodClimate modelScalingClimate extremesDuration (music)Scale (ratio)Atmospheric sciencesPrecipitationMeteorologyGeographyGeologyMathematicsFlood myth

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

One of the most important impacts of a future warmer climate is the projected increase in the frequency and intensity of extreme
\nrainfall events. This increasing trend in extreme rainfall is seen in both the observational record and climate model projections. However, a
\nthorough review of the recent scientific literature paints a complex picture in which the intensification of rainfall extremes depends on a
\nmultitude of factors. While some projected rainfall indices follow the Clausius-Clapeyron relationship scaling of an ∼7% increase in
\nrainfall per 1°C of warming, there is substantial evidence that this scaling depends on rainfall extremes frequency, with longer return
\nperiod events seeing larger increases, leading to super Clausius-Clapeyron scaling in some cases. The intensification of extreme rainfall
\nevents is now well documented at the daily scale but is less clear at the subdaily scale. In recent years, climate model simulations at a finer
\nspatial and temporal resolution, including convection-permitting models, have provided more reliable projections of subdaily rainfall.
\nRecent analyses indicate that rainfall scaling may also increase as a function of duration, such that shorter-duration, longer return period
\nevents will likely see the largest rainfall increases in a warmer climate. This has broad implications on the design and the use of rainfall
\nintensity–duration–frequency (IDF) curves, for which both an overall increase in magnitude and a steepening can now be predicted. This
\npaper also presents an overview of measures that have been adopted by various governing bodies to adapt IDF curves to the changing
\nclimate. Current measures vary from multiplying historical design rainfall by a simple constant percentage to modulating correction factors
\nbased on return periods and to scaling them to the Clausius-Clapeyron relationship based on projected temperature increases. All of these
\ncurrent measures fail to recognize a possible super Clausius-Clapeyron scaling of extreme rainfall and, perhaps more importantly, the
\nincreasing scaling toward shorter-duration rainfall and the most extreme rainfall events that will significantly impact stormwater runoff in
\ncities and in small rural catchments. This paper discusses the remaining scientific gaps and offers technical recommendations for practi-
\ntioners on how to adapt IDF curves to improve climate resilience

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.811
Threshold uncertainty score0.215

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
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 head0.145
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.165 · 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