MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4392585647 · doi:10.5194/egusphere-egu24-4140

Integrating Deterministic and Probabilistic Approaches for Improved Hydrological Predictions: Insights from Multi-model Assessment in the Great Lakes Watersheds

2024· preprint· en· W4392585647 on OpenAlexaffabout
Jonathan Romero-Cuéllar, Rezgar Arabzadeh, James R. Craig, Bryan A. Tolson, Juliane Mai

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrology and Watershed Management Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProbabilistic logicComputer scienceEnvironmental scienceHydrology (agriculture)Artificial intelligenceGeologyGeotechnical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The utilization of probabilistic streamflow predictions holds considerable value in the domains of predictive uncertainty estimation, hydrologic risk management, and decision support in water resources. Typically, the quantification of predictive uncertainty is formulated and evaluated using a solitary hydrological model, posing challenges in extrapolating findings to diverse model configurations. To address this limitation, this study examines variations in the performance ranking of various streamflow models through the application of a residual error model post-processing approach across multiple basins and models. The assessment encompasses 141 basins within the Great Lakes watershed, spanning the USA and Canada, and involves the evaluation of 13 diverse streamflow models using deterministic and probabilistic performance metrics. This investigation scrutinizes the interdependence between the quality of probabilistic streamflow estimation and the underlying model quality. The results underscore that the selection of a streamflow model significantly influences the robustness of probabilistic predictions. Notably, transitioning from deterministic to probabilistic predictions, facilitated by a post-processing approach, maintains the performance ranking consistency for the best and worst deterministic models. However, models of intermediate rank in deterministic evaluation exhibit inconsistent rankings when evaluated in probabilistic mode. Furthermore, the study reveals that post-processing residual errors of long short-term memory (LSTM) network models consistently outperform other models in both deterministic and probabilistic metrics. This research emphasizes the importance of integrating deterministic streamflow model predictions with residual error models to enhance the quality and utility of hydrological predictions. It elucidates the extent to which the efficacy of probabilistic predictions is contingent upon the sound performance of the underlying model and its potential to compensate for deficiencies in model performance. Ultimately, these findings underscore the significance of combining deterministic and probabilistic approaches for improving hydrological predictions, quantifying uncertainty, and supporting decision-making in operational water management.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.036
Threshold uncertainty score0.072

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.220 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicHydrology and Watershed Management Studies→French-language works237,207→