MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W6941170476 · doi:10.11575/prism/42748

Assessing Variabilities of Extreme Precipitation and Snow Depth Using Climate and Stochastic Models

2024· other· en· W6941170476 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen MIND · 2024
Typeother
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicMycorrhizal Fungi and Plant Interactions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSnowmeltPrecipitationClimate changeFlood mythClimate modelFlooding (psychology)SnowCoupled model intercomparison projectBivariate analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Floods are natural disasters with a significant impact on regions worldwide. They cause extensive damage to infrastructure, disrupt transportation and communication networks, and lead to the displacement of populations. Moreover, floods have long-term consequences on ecosystems, agriculture, and economies. In recent years, Canada has experienced several devastating flood events, highlighting the nation’s vulnerability to such disasters. Climate change, with its associated extreme weather patterns, has exacerbated the frequency and intensity of these events. Specifically, heavy rainfall and rapid snowmelt have triggered extensive flooding in multiple provinces. As global temperatures rise and weather patterns change, the world must remain vigilant and adapt approaches to address the evolving threat of floods. To address this issue, we present an extensive investigation of climate models’ performance in reproducing annual maxima of daily precipitation (AMP) globally and daily snow depth (SD) in Canadian catchments. We analyze projections for extreme precipitation, emphasizing the importance of adopting non-stationary models. Additionally, we introduce a stochastic model replicating SD time series with the same observed statistical properties to overcome limited observed SD data. These studies employ advanced and novel statistical methods, including bivariate analyses, L-moment metrics, Monte Carlo analysis, and autoregressive models. To accurately assess climate models, we use numerous unique observational datasets, along with the latest generation of climate models, the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6), to reflect recent advances in climate change impacts. First, the results show that 70% of CMIP6 models exhibit a percentage difference of ±10% in annual maxima mean and variation. However, CMIP6 simulations generally overestimate daily SD by at least 10%, with some regions challenging to simulate due to their complex atmospheric and land interactions, such as the Arctic and tropical regions. Second, extreme precipitation projections indicate that the return period of 100-year historical events will decrease by approximately 50% and 70% in the northern and southern hemispheres, respectively. Under the highest emission scenario, the projected 100-year levels are expected to increase by 7.5% to 21% over historical levels. Using stationary models to estimate the 100-year return level for AMP projections with trends leads to an average underestimation of 3.4%. Third, the developed stochastic model can reproduce daily distributions, temporal clustering and correlation, daily probability of zero, and annual seasonal patterns. This model can provide a reliable synthetic time series of SD, minimizing the scarcity of observed data for SD. This thesis provides engineers with essential information about climate change impacts, climate model performance, statistical behaviour of various models, and necessary datasets related to AMP and SD, which contribute to severe floods. Therefore, the findings are essential for hydrological, hydrodynamical, ecological, and water resources applications, helping society adapt to extreme climate conditions.

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)0.006
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.398
Threshold uncertainty score0.791

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.107
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.204 · 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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen MIND→Same topicMycorrhizal Fungi and Plant Interactions→French-language works237,207→