Mechanisms of spring freshet generation in southern Quebec, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Seasonal forecasting of spring floods in snow-covered basins is challenging due to the ambiguity in the driving processes, uncertain estimations of antecedent catchment conditions, and the choice of predictor variables. In this study, we attempt to improve the prediction of spring flow peaks in southern Quebec, Canada, by studying the preconditioning mechanisms of runoff generation and their impact on inter-annual variations in the timing and magnitude of spring peak flow. Historical observations and simulated data from a hydrological and snowmelt model were used to study the antecedent conditions that control flood characteristics in 12 unregulated snow-dominated catchments. Maximum snow accumulation (peak SWE), snowmelt and rainfall volume and intensity, soil moisture, river baseflow, and the air freezing index, a proxy for soil freezing, were estimated during the pre-flood period. Stepwise multiple linear regression was used to identify the most relevant predictors and assess their relative contribution to interannual variability flood variability. Peak SWE was not by itself a strong predictor of spring flood magnitude and timing. The snowmelt rate during the pre-flood period was the most ubiquitous and skillful predictor of spring flood magnitude, followed by the rainfall intensity. The ‘soil memory’ effect, represented here by the simulated soil moisture content and freezing depth, was generally poorly related to flood characteristics. SWE and snowmelt dynamics dominated the interannual variability of flood magnitude in the southern and agricultural basins while rainfall intensity had a stronger influence in the northern, snowier forested basins. More complex machine learning models (random forest and support vector regression) did not perform better than the simple linear models to predict peakflow from antecedent hydroclimatic factors. These results highlight the impact of climate and land cover and use on spring flood generation mechanism and the moderate predictability potential of spring floods based on antecedent hydrological factors.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".