MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391180037 · doi:10.1016/j.jhydrol.2024.130678

Regional flood frequency analysis in North Africa

2024· article· en· W4391180037 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Yves Tramblay, El Mahdi El Khalki, Abderrahmane Khedimallah, Mahrez Sadaoui, Lahcen Benaabidate, Tayeb Boulmaiz, Hamouda Boutaghane, Hamouda Dakhlaoui, Lahoucine Hanich, Wolfgang Ludwig, Mohamed Meddi, Mohamed Elmehdi Saidi, Gil Mahé

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Hydrology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrology and Drought Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversité de Moncton
KeywordsFlood mythDrainage basinSpurious relationshipQuantileMagnitude (astronomy)Environmental science100-year floodHydrology (agriculture)RegressionEstimationNatural hazardRegression analysisPhysical geographyDigital elevation modelGeographyGeologyStatisticsCartographyMeteorologyRemote sensing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Maghreb countries located in North Africa are strongly impacted by floods, causing extended damage and numerous deaths. Until now, the lack of accessibility of river discharge data prevented regional studies on potential changes in flood hazards or the development of regional flood frequency estimation methods. A new database of daily river discharge data for 98 river basins located in Algeria, Morocco, and Tunisia, has been compiled, with an average of 36 years of complete records over the time period 1960–2018. A peaks-over-threshold sampling of flood events is considered first to detect trends in the annual frequency and the magnitude of floods. The trend analysis results revealed no significant changes in flood frequency or magnitude at the regional level, with only a few spurious trends due to isolated extreme or clustered events. An envelope curve relating maximum floods for a range of catchment areas in North Africa has been developed, for the first time in this region with such a large database. Then, regional estimation methods for flood quantiles were compared. The regional estimation from multiple catchment characteristics (including soil types, land use, elevation, and geology) was performed by comparing two multiple linear regression methods, Stepwise regression and Lasso regression, and a machine learning algorithm, Random Forests. Results indicate a better performance of the Lasso regression to estimate flood quantiles at ungauged locations, with mean absolute relative errors close to 50 % and relative bias close to 20 %. The most relevant catchment predictors identified by the regression models are the topographic wetness index, which provides better estimates than catchment area, but also altitude, mean annual rainfall, and soil bulk density. The results of this study could be useful to improve operational procedures for sizing hydraulic structures at ungauged sites.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.115
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.219 · 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.

Study designObservational
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

Citations31
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of HydrologySame topicHydrology and Drought AnalysisFrench-language works237,207