MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4408445482 · doi:10.5194/egusphere-egu25-1916

Dynamic Combination of a Multi-Model Ensemble for Improved Streamflow Simulations

2025· preprint· en· W4408445482 on OpenAlexaff
Cyril Thébault, Wouter Knoben, Nans Addor, Martyn Clark

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrology and Watershed Management Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStreamflowComputer scienceGeographyCartography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Accurate streamflow simulations are needed to manage water resources, evaluate flooding risks, and support agriculture and industry. Traditional ensemble approaches are usually based on meteorological ensemble but rarely consider hydrological ensemble. However, hydrological forecasts based on a single model often fail to capture the dynamic nature of hydrological systems. Addressing this gap, we present a novel dynamic combination method that adaptively leverages hydrological ensemble diversity to enhance streamflow simulations.Using the Framework for Understanding Structural Errors (FUSE), we generated 78 hydrological models applied to 559 catchments from the CAMELS dataset across the contiguous United States. Each model was calibrated to optimize both high-flow and low-flow performance, producing a hydrological ensemble of 156 members per catchment. Our dynamic combination approach can be divided in two parts: a conceptual k-nearest neighbor algorithm to identify similar historical conditions and then model predictions at the time step of interest are weighted based on their performance for the k-nearest neighbors.Results demonstrate that this dynamic combination approach improves upon traditional static methods, particularly in representing diverse streamflow conditions. The method captures temporal variability, reduces trade-offs among objective functions, and provides a model-agnostic framework for enhanced streamflow simulations. While the approach shows promising results, it faces limitations in its reliance on hydrological ensemble and meteorological data quality. Future work could explore machine learning integration for dynamic combination and applications to real-time forecasting and ungauged catchments.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.263 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicHydrology and Watershed Management Studies→French-language works237,207→