A stochastic conceptual-data-driven approach for improved hydrological simulations
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In a companion paper, Sikorska-Senoner and Quilty (2021) introduced the ensemble-based conceptual-data-driven approach (CDDA) for improving hydrological simulations. This approach consists of an ensemble of hydrological model (HM) simulations (generated via different parameter sets) whose residuals are ‘corrected’ by a data-driven model (one per HM parameter set), resulting in an improved ensemble simulation. Through a case study involving three Swiss catchments, it was demonstrated that CDDA generates significantly improved ensemble streamflow simulations when compared to the ensemble HM. In this follow-up study, a stochastic version of CDDA (SCDDA) is developed that, in addition to parameter uncertainty, accounts for input data, input variable selection, and model output uncertainty. Using several deterministic and probabilistic performance metrics, it is shown that SCDDA results in significantly more accurate and reliable ensemble-based streamflow simulations than the CDDA, ensemble and stochastic HMs, and a quantile regression-based approach, improving the mean interval score by 26–79%.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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 it