You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
The river height is visible, which is why I focused on it initially. But someone at USGS suggested trying the same analysis focusing on discharge instead of height. Height has an upper bound, so if the river is less than 2.5 feet from the max height, it can never go critical in this model.
If we can find critical values for the discharge rate and it gives a comparable true positive rate, this might be a more reliable model.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
The river height is visible, which is why I focused on it initially. But someone at USGS suggested trying the same analysis focusing on discharge instead of height. Height has an upper bound, so if the river is less than 2.5 feet from the max height, it can never go critical in this model.
If we can find critical values for the discharge rate and it gives a comparable true positive rate, this might be a more reliable model.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: