MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Identifying Hydrologic Regimes and Drivers in Nova Scotia, Canada: Catchment Classification Efforts for a Data-Limited Region

2022· article· en· W4295835944 on OpenAlexaffabout
Lindsay H. Johnston, Dewey Dunnington, Mark C. Greenwood, Barret L. Kurylyk, Rob Jamieson

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Hydrologic Engineering · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrology and Watershed Management Studies
Canadian institutionsEnvironment and Climate Change CanadaDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStreamflowDecision treeNova scotiaDrainage basinHydrological modellingRandom forestWater resourcesHydrology (agriculture)Environmental scienceComputer scienceData miningGeographyClimatologyEcologyMachine learningCartographyGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Nova Scotia is a small maritime province with limited capacity to gauge its abundant water resources, but it possesses a diverse geologic setting and surface water distribution. The common engineering practice of using nearest neighbor catchments as hydrologic surrogates may be unreliable in regions such as this. Catchment classification provides a tool to identify and explain variability in hydrologic regimes and inform data transfer across catchments. Here we develop a catchment classification framework using hydrometric, climatic, and landscape data from Nova Scotia, Canada. An inductive classification approach was first used to identify five generalized hydrologic metaclasses based on streamflow signatures derived from 47 long-term streamflow records. We then attempted to replicate this classification using deductive approaches, and identified key physiographic and meteorological variables that could be useful in classifying ungauged catchments. Due to the limited number of gauged catchments, two supervised deductive classification methodologies were applied for comparison: (1) an automated approach often used in more data-rich scenarios (random forests and classification and regression trees); and (2) a nonautomated approach, which involved manual construction and testing of decision trees. The products of the automated approach (random forests), although more robust, may be challenging to apply, while the manually constructed decision tree, which was guided by a combination of local knowledge and theoretical reasoning, could be a useful tool for practitioners. Climate did not emerge as a particularly strong controlling factor in hydrologic variability in this region, but surface water storage had an important role in flow regime across the province. Results demonstrate that this type of hybrid approach can be effective for understanding hydrologic variability and identifying surrogate watersheds in data-limited regions.

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 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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.107
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.199 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations8
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Hydrologic EngineeringSame topicHydrology and Watershed Management StudiesFrench-language works237,207