Development of a Joint Probabilistic Rainfall‐Runoff Model for High‐to‐Extreme Flow Projections Under Changing Climatic Conditions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Machine learning (ML) models have been widely used for hydrological simulation. Previous studies have reported that conventional ML models fail to accurately simulate extreme flows which are crucial for design flood estimation and associated risk analysis in the context of climate change. Therefore, this study proposes a joint probabilistic rainfall‐runoff model (JPRR) for improving high‐to‐extreme flow projection. With the aid of paired copula constructions, bootstrap aggregation, and multi‐model ensemble approaches, the proposed model is able to effectively characterize the dependence relationships of predictors (i.e., precipitation time series with different moving sums) with various probability distributions. JPRR has been applied to four pristine basins in China, representing different climate zones and landscapes. The results reveal that JPRR significantly outperforms three well‐known ML models (i.e., random forest, artificial neural networks, and long short‐term memory) in high‐to‐extreme flow simulations. In JPRR, the copulas exhibiting the right tail dependence play a more important role in streamflow simulations at mountainous basins. Moreover, a significant difference in streamflow projections (from 2030 to 2099) derived from JPRR and benchmark models imply that flood risks from conventional ML models may be underestimated under changing climatic conditions.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".