Identification of flood seasonality and drivers across Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Floods are the most frequently occurring natural hazard in Canada. An in‐depth understanding of flood seasonality and its drivers at a national scale is essential. Here, a circular, statistics‐based approach is implemented to understand the seasonality of annual‐maximum floods (streamflow) and to identify their responsible drivers across Canada. Nearly 80% and 70% of flood events were found to occur during spring and summer in eastern and western watersheds across Canada, respectively. Flooding in the eastern and western watersheds was primarily driven by snowmelt and extreme precipitation, respectively. This observation suggests that increases in temperature have led to early spring snowmelt‐induced floods throughout eastern Canada. Our results indicate that precipitation (snowmelt) variability can exert large controls on the magnitude of flood peaks in western (eastern) watersheds in Canada. Further, the nonstationarity of flood peaks is modelled to account for impact of the dynamic behaviour of the identified flood drivers on extreme‐flood magnitude by using a cluster of 74 generalized additive models for location scale and shape models, which can capture both the linear and nonlinear characteristics of flood‐peak changes and can model its dependence on external covariates. Using nonstationary frequency analysis, we find that increasing precipitation and snowmelt magnitudes directly resulted in a significant increase in 50‐year streamflow. Our results highlight an east–west asymmetry in flood seasonality, indicating the existence of a climate signal in flood observations. The understating of flood seasonality and flood responses under the dynamic characteristics of precipitation and snowmelt extremes may facilitate the predictability of such events, which can aid in predicting and managing their impacts.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".