MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405400428 · doi:10.3808/jeil.202400143

Modelling for Improved Flood Forecasting in the Bow River Basin Using Prophet

2024· article· en· W4405400428 on OpenAlexfundaboutno aff
A. A. Dash, Kinardo Flores-Castro, Edward A. McBean

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Environmental Informatics Letters · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrology and Watershed Management Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsFlood forecastingFlood mythGeologyHydrology (agriculture)Structural basinEnvironmental scienceDrainage basinMeteorologyGeographyCartographyGeomorphologyArchaeologyGeotechnical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The catastrophic flood of the Bow River in 2013 had a significant impact on Calgary, Canada, and citizen's lives, showing the need for early warning systems and preparedness ahead-of-time. AI-based models that integrate climate and historical flow data, using the Prophet algorithm as applied in this research, demonstrate high accuracy in predictions for 15-, 10-, 5-day-ahead and 24-hour-ahead during extreme events in the Bow River, Banff. The predictions 5-day-ahead and 24-hour-ahead are 96.1% and 98.8% accurate, respectively, to the actual event on June 21st, 2013, as a particular case study. The Prophet algorithm shows significant benefits that maintain consistent nonlinear trends with daily, and weekly seasonality. This model also works with diverse components such as trends with high accuracy and greatly improves results using, for example, the GMDH algorithm. A comparison of evaluation metrics for the GMDH and Prophet models indicates that the GMDH model shows R², RMSE, and MAE values of 0.64, 46.8, and 6.70 respectively, with a disparity in accuracy and an absence of trend between the target and the dependent variables. The GMDH model performs well with a timestep of 17 h, but the accuracy significantly decreases with a timestep prediction of 120 h or 5-day-ahead, rendering the model's utility minimal. In contrast, the Prophet model features better prediction of time series data with higher evaluation metrics of R², RMSE, and MAE values of 0.97, 41.7, and 3.19, respectively.

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)0.002
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 score0.052
Threshold uncertainty score0.104

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.192 · 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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Environmental Informatics LettersSame topicHydrology and Watershed Management StudiesFrench-language works237,207