MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409640784 · doi:10.1371/journal.pwat.0000359

Improved streamflow prediction accuracy in Boreal climate watershed using a LSTM model: A comparative study

2025· article· en· W4409640784 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

VenuePLOS Water · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrology and Watershed Management Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMemorial University of Newfoundland
KeywordsStreamflowWatershedBorealStream flowClimatologyEnvironmental scienceTaigaClimate changeMeteorologyHydrology (agriculture)GeographyComputer scienceMachine learningGeologyCartographyOceanographyDrainage basinForestryArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Streamflow plays a vital role in water resource management and environmental impact assessment. This study is a novel application of the Long Short-Term Memory (LSTM) model, a type of recurrent neural network, for real-time streamflow prediction in the Upper Humber River Watershed in western Newfoundland. It also compares the performance of the LSTM model with the physically based SWAT model. The LSTM model was optimized by tuning hyperparameters and adjusting the window size to balance capturing historical data and ensuring prediction stability. Using single input variables such as daily average temperature or precipitation, the LSTM achieved a high Nash-Sutcliffe Efficiency (NSE) of 0.95. In comparison, the results show that the LSTM model delivers a more competitive performance, achieving an NSE of 0.95 versus SWAT’s 0.77, and a percent bias (PBIAS) of 0.62 compared to SWAT’s 8.26. Unlike SWAT, the LSTM model does not overestimate high flows and excels in predicting low flows. Additionally, the LSTM successfully predicted daily streamflow using real-time data. Despite challenges in interpretability and generalizability, the LSTM model demonstrated strong performance, particularly during extreme events, making it a valuable tool for streamflow prediction in cold climates where accurate forecasts are crucial for effective water management. This study highlights the potential of the LSTM model’s application to water resource management.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.834
Threshold uncertainty score0.528

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.246 · 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