MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7116682038 · doi:10.3390/hydrology13010005

Beyond the Flow: Multifractal Clustering of River Discharge Across Canada Using Near-Century Data

2025· article· en· W7116682038 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Adeyemi Olusola, Samuel Ogunjo, Christiana Olusegun

Bibliographic record

VenueHydrology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicComplex Systems and Time Series Analysis
Canadian institutionsYork University
FundersYork University
KeywordsMultifractal systemScalingCluster analysisHurst exponentFractalExponentCluster (spacecraft)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

River discharge scaling is fundamental to the global hydrological cycle and to water resource assessment. This study investigates the existence of multiple scaling regimes and introduces a novel framework for clustering river discharge using multiscale fractal characteristics. We analyzed daily discharge data from 38 stations across continental Canada over an 80-year period. Multifractal characterization was performed at decadal and long-term scales using three key parameters: the singularity exponent (α0), multifractal strength (α), and asymmetry index (r). K-means clustering in the α−r, α0−r, and α−α0 planes revealed distinct clusters, with the asymmetric parameter (r) emerging as the strongest distinguishing factor. These clusters represent groups of rivers with similar dynamical structures: the α−r clusters categorize discharge based on scaling strength and fluctuation influence. Analysis of the generalized Hurst exponent revealed anti-persistent behavior at most stations, with exceptions at five specific locations. This multifractal clustering approach provides a powerful method for classifying river regimes based on intrinsic characteristics and identifying the physical drivers of discharge fluctuations.

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 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 score0.605
Threshold uncertainty score0.483

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 science0.0010.001
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.219 · 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 teacher head, 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 routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHydrologySame topicComplex Systems and Time Series AnalysisFrench-language works237,207