Assessing the Frequency of Floods in Ice-Covered Rivers under a Changing Climate: Review of Methodology
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ice-influenced hydrologic and hydrodynamic processes often cause floods in cold regions of the globe. These floods are typically associated with ice jams and can have negative socio-economic impacts, while their impacts on riverine ecosystems can be both detrimental and beneficial. Several methods have been proposed for constructing frequency distributions of ice-influenced annual peak stages where historical data are scarce, or for estimating future frequencies under different climate change scenarios. Such methods rely on historical discharge data, which are generally easier to obtain than peak stages. Future discharges can be simulated via hydrological models, driven by climate-model output. Binary sequences of historical flood/no-flood occurrences have been studied using logistic regression on physics-based explanatory variables or exclusively weather-controlled proxies, bypassing the hydrological modelling step in climate change projections. Herein, background material on relevant river ice processes is presented first, followed by descriptions of various proposed methods to quantify flood risk and assess their advantages and disadvantages. Discharge-based methods are more rigorous; however, projections of future flood risk can benefit from improved hydrological simulations of winter and spring discharges. The more convenient proxy-based regressions may not adequately reflect the controlling physics-based variables, while extrapolation of regression results to altered climatic conditions entails further uncertainty.
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 | 0.013 | 0.022 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.010 | 0.012 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
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".