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 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.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

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.

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)0.001
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 score0.040
Threshold uncertainty score0.361

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.025
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