Classification: correct Confidence: Model confidence remains medium. This event confirms the model handles low/no-rainfall days correctly. Further calibration is needed for significant rise events, as recent history shows 'no_prediction' failures for larger events.
The model correctly predicted a near-baseline gauge peak of 1.0 ft on a dry day with negligible QPE, matching the observed maximum of 1.01 ft.
| Metric | Predicted | Actual | Error |
|---|---|---|---|
| Peak height | 1.0 ft | 1.01 ft | -0.01 ft |
| Total rise | — | 0.13 ft | — |
| Band | Zone | Precip | Predicted Rise | Intensity | Moisture |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Headline: No rise indicated by recent rainfall Settled outcome: None (reached None) LLM said headline was correct: True Notes: The empirical headline predicted 'No rise indicated' and 'below_low' tier. The actual peak was 1.01 ft, well below the 3.0 ft low threshold. The outcome matches the forecast.
The prediction error was minimal at -1.0% (1.0 ft predicted vs 1.01 ft observed). The gauge precipitation sensor recorded 0.0 inches, and QPE inputs were very low (max hourly ~0.33 inches in Band 2, ~0.20 in Band 1), occurring in a short burst. Given the antecedent moisture was NORMAL and the rainfall volume was insufficient to trigger significant runoff or exceedance of the 3.0 ft low threshold, the model's conservative estimate of a minor rise was accurate.
The timing discrepancy of 1.6 hours is negligible for a non-event where the water level barely fluctuated above the daily minimum. The hydrograph shape was sharp but the magnitude was trivial (0.13 ft rise). Since the predicted peak closely aligns with the actual peak in both magnitude and the qualitative assessment of 'no meaningful rise', this is a correct prediction.
No changes made.
Model confidence remains medium. This event confirms the model handles low/no-rainfall days correctly. Further calibration is needed for significant rise events, as recent history shows 'no_prediction' failures for larger events.