ArticleScientific reports2026
Assessing the onset of spring water-level rise in snowmelt-dominated rivers of northeastern Russia using machine learning.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The timing of the initial spring water-level rise represents a key indicator of seasonal hydrological transition in snowmelt-dominated river systems of high-latitude regions. This study evaluates the capability of ensemble machine learning (ML) models to estimate the onset date of the spring water-level rise in Arctic-subarctic rivers of the Anadyr-Kolyma basin district in northeastern Russia using a station-year dataset for the period 2008-2022, combining hydrological observations with meteorological and basin-related predictors. Five regression algorithms were tested using grouped cross-validation by year. CatBoost achieved the highest predictive accuracy with an out-of-fold mean absolute error of 4.54 days, RMSE of 9.79 days, and [Formula: see text], slightly outperforming ExtraTrees (MAE 4.66 days) and RandomForest (MAE 4.70 days). Spatial analysis shows that most gauging stations exhibit prediction errors within 0.5-3 days, whereas errors exceeding 10 days occur mainly in small or topographically complex basins with limited observational coverage. Model interpretation using SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) and partial dependence (PDP) analysis indicates that predictors describing thermal forcing during late winter and early spring dominate the model response, with positive degree days during March-April, the first thaw day, and indicators of rapid water-level rise providing the largest contributions. The onset of spring water-level rise in the studied Arctic-subarctic river systems is primarily associated with the interaction between temperature-driven snowmelt processes and the early hydrological response of the river network, whereas precipitation and spatial descriptors exhibit comparatively smaller contributions. These statistical relationships are conditioned on the 2008-2022 period and may vary under different climatic conditions or longer observational records, which should be considered when applying the model for prediction.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.