MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4393036978 · doi:10.2166/wcc.2024.706

Deep learning modeling framework for multi-resolution streamflow generation

2024· article· en· W4393036978 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Fernanda Custodio Pereira do Carmo, Jeenu John, Laxmi Sushama, Muhammad Naveed Khaliq

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Water and Climate Change · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrology and Watershed Management Studies
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council CanadaMcGill University
FundersCanadian Space AgencyTrottier Institute for Sustainability in Engineering and DesignAlliance de recherche numérique du CanadaNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMcGill University
KeywordsStreamflowEnvironmental scienceClimatologyClimate changeRange (aeronautics)Hydrological modellingSurface runoffHydrology (agriculture)Climate modelDrainage basinMeteorologyGeographyGeologyCartography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Generating continuous streamflow information through integrated climate-hydrology modeling at fine spatial scales of the order of a few kilometers is often challenged by computational costs associated with running high-resolution (HR) climate models. To address this challenge, the present study explores deep learning approaches to generate HR streamflow information from that at low resolution (LR), based on runoff generated by climate models. Two sets of daily streamflow simulations spanning 10 years (2011–2020), at LR (50 km) and HR (5 km), for the Ottawa River basin, Canada, are employed. The proposed deep learning model is trained using upscaled features derived from LR streamflow simulation for the 2011–2018 period as input and the corresponding HR streamflow simulation as the target; data for 2019 are used for validation. The model estimates for the year 2020, when compared with unseen HR data for the same year, suggest good performance, with differences in monthly mean values for different accumulation area categories in the −0.7–5% range and correlation coefficients for streamflow values for the same accumulation area categories in the 0.92–0.96 range. The developed framework can be ported to other watersheds for generating similar information, which is required in climate change adaptation studies.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.050

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.073
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.218 · 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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Water and Climate ChangeSame topicHydrology and Watershed Management StudiesFrench-language works237,207