MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W588002828

Changement climatique et risque hydrologique : évaluation de la méthode SCHADEX en contexte non-stationnaire

2013· dissertation· fr· W588002828 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Pierre Brigode

Bibliographic record

VenueHAL (Le Centre pour la Communication Scientifique Directe) · 2013
Typedissertation
Languagefr
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrology and Watershed Management Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsForestryHumanitiesPolitical scienceGeographyPhilosophy
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Since 2006, Électricité de France (EDF) applies a new hydro-climatological approach of extreme rainfall and flood predetermination - the SCHADEX method - for the design of dam spillways. In a context of potential increase of extreme event intensity and frequency due to climate change, the use of the SCHADEX method in non-stationary conditions is a main interest topic for EDF hydrologists. Thus, the scientific goal of this Ph.D. thesis work has been to evaluate the ability of the SCHADEX method to take into account future climate simulations for the estimation of future extreme floods. The recognized inabilities of climate models and downscaling methods to simulate (extreme) rainfall distribution at the catchment-scale have been avoided, by developing and testing new methodological approaches. Moreover, the decomposition of the flood-producing factors proposed by the SCHADEX method has been used for considering different simulated climatic evolutions and for quantifying the relative impact of these factors on the extreme flood estimation. First, the SCHADEX method has been applied in present time over different climatic contexts (France, Austria, Canada and Norway), thanks to several colorations with academic and industrial partners. A sensitivity analysis allowed to quantify the extreme flood estimation sensitivity to rainfall hazard, catchment saturation hazard and rainfall-runoff transformation, independently. The results showed a large sensitivity of SCHADEX flood estimations to the rainfall hazard and to the rainfall-runoff transformation. Using the sensitivity analysis results, tests have been done in order to estimate the future evolution of "key" variables previously identified. New climate model outputs (done within the CMIP5 project) have been analyzed and used for determining future frequency of rainfall events and future catchment saturation conditions. Considering these simulated evolutions within the SCHADEX method lead to a significant decrease of simulated extreme floods. In order to predict the future intensity of rainfall events with air temperature simulated series, tests have been performed on several hundred of French catchment rainfall series, trying to link observed air temperature with observed rainfall event intensity. The results obtained show a mean heavy rainfall intensity increase of 6% per degree of air temperature rise, at the daily timescale. Nevertheless, supplementary tests are needed in order to estimate the timestep and the temperature range at which this rainfall event intensity increase is valid. Finally, these different future evolutions have all been used as inputs of the SCHADEX method. This last test showed the difficulty to quantify the impact of climate change on extreme floods due to a combination of extreme flood decrease factors (extreme flood decrease due both to future rainfall event frequency and catchment saturation condition evolution) and extreme flood increase factor (extreme flood increase due to an increase of future rainfall event intensity ). Even if the extreme flood estimation sensitivity analysis has raised numerous questions about the rainfall-runoff model calibration within the SCHADEX method, quantifying the future rainfall event intensity is the key question for the extreme rainfall and flood predetermination in a climate change context.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.024
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 score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.051

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.024
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.239 · 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
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHAL (Le Centre pour la Communication Scientifique Directe)→Same topicHydrology and Watershed Management Studies→French-language works237,207→