MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404995577 · doi:10.1016/j.rineng.2024.103645

Non-stationary analysis of future floods using physical covariates and implications for dams across Canada

2024· article· en· W4404995577 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueResults in Engineering · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrology and Drought Analysis
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council CanadaMcGill University
FundersInfrastructure CanadaNational Research Council CanadaNational Research Council
KeywordsCovariateEnvironmental scienceGeographyEconometricsEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

• Climate change vulnerability assessment of critical water infrastructures based on non-stationary flood frequency analyses • The non-stationary models with physical covariates identified using the corrected form of the Akaike Information Criterion conform to the spatial variability of flood generating mechanisms • The non-stationary flood frequency analysis approach is able to uncover undetectable flood vulnerable regions and structures compared to the stationary and conventional approaches Non-stationary flood frequency analysis (FFA) has gained much momentum in recent years. However, most of the applications have considered time as the sole covariate, which may not be fully adept given the varied evolution of flood predictors. Incorporating physical covariates representing dominant flood generating mechanisms can enable more precise flood risk assessments. This study applies non-stationary FFA with flood-relevant physical covariates to assess dam vulnerability across Canada, using transient climate change simulations from a regional climate model, one-way coupled to a routing model, for the current 1991–2020 and future 2070–2099 periods. From a set of 10 non-stationary models, considering maximum snow water equivalent, average annual temperature, spring-summer rainfall, fall-winter rainfall, and their combinations as plausible physical covariates, the preferred model for each grid cell is selected through a corrected form of the Akaike Information Criterion. The spatial patterns of physical covariates of the preferred models are, in general, found consistent with the flood generating mechanisms. Little support is found for the traditional stationary FFA approach compared to the non-stationary FFA with physical covariates. Application of the preferred model for the RCP8.5 scenario suggest that 67.5% of dams, from a pre-identified set of medium and large dams, are located in vulnerable regions, far exceeding the stationary model estimates. The study provides useful insights, both for the development of non-stationary FFA models considering physical covariates and their application in the vulnerability assessment of critical water infrastructure in Canada, thereby contributing to the development of climate change adaptation strategies.

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.127
Threshold uncertainty score0.979

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.265 · 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