Flood scenario spatio-temporal mapping via hydrological and hydrodynamic modelling and a remote sensing dataset: A case study of the Basento river (Southern Italy)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Today, hydrological and hydraulic modelling are essential tools for flood risk management, although these models are still affected by elements of uncertainty that needs to be reduced by optimizing their results. The present research aims to implement an operational mechanism on the Basento river basin in Southern Italy based on the cascading use of a physically based concentrated-parameter hydrological model for the estimation of flood hydrographs, and a two-dimensional hydraulic model for flood mapping. The calibration of the hydrological model uses physical information to reduce the initial range of the set parameter values, and an automated optimisation procedure based on a genetic algorithm to find optimal values of the model parameters by comparing simulated and observed data for the 2013 flood event. To calibrate the hydraulic model, a series of flood maps extracted from multi-temporal SAR images was used. In addition, validation of the hydrological and hydraulic models was carried out on March 2011 flood event. The results show the reliability of the models during both calibration and validation, with the hydrological model achieving a Nash-Sutcliffe Efficiency coefficient between 0.86 and 0.91, and the hydraulic model leading to results with an accuracy close to 70 %. Considering the significance of the results, the developed modelling chain was used to simulate future event scenarios for risk management assessment and could operate as an early warning system.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".