A reach-integrated hydraulic modelling approach for large-scale and real-time inundation mapping
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Flooding is one of the world's most common and costly natural hazards, inflicting billions in damages each year. However, current hydraulic models to support flood mapping are not well suited for large-scale applications or frequent updates, either due to limited accuracy of simple methods or lack of scalability (i.e. large computational requirements) for more sophisticated hydrodynamic models. This results in flood maps being decades out of date or simply nonexistent in some areas. Recent advances in generating flood maps have been made seemingly in parallel between geospatial methods and hydrodynamic models, such as the Height Above Nearest Drainage (HAND) method, hybrid 1D–2D hydrodynamic models, and more efficient computing of 2D models. This study presents the Geospatially Augmented Standard Step (GASS) method, which combines a novel improvement to the HAND method, Dynamic Height Above Nearest Drainage (DHAND), with a 1D hydraulic model for rapid flood inundation mapping at large scales while maintaining the accuracy of hydrodynamic models. This method is implemented into a new modelling software package called Blackbird and is tested via verification of the code and a benchmark case study comparing multiple approaches in the ability to approximate 2D model results. The Blackbird model vastly outperforms the simpler HAND–Manning method and also outperforms a traditional HEC-RAS 1D model when evaluated for accuracy of approximating a 2D model benchmark. This new method is shown to reduce the incidence of falsely predicting flooded areas through improved resolution of landscape connections over HAND-based or 1D hydraulic models. Blackbird also streamlines the model development effort relative to existing 1D or 2D models while maintaining a computational speed that was 10 000 times faster (a few seconds compared to a few hours) than a comparable 2D model in one case study. The method also allows for future integration of hydraulic structures, ice jams, and other features that are unavailable in HAND-based models. Overall, the GASS method provides a viable option for large-scale and real-time fluvial flood mapping applications.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".