---
title: "Fusing Earth observation embeddings and spaceborne terrain with meteorological forcing for flood peak depth prediction from high-water marks"
source: "arXiv AI/CL/LG（论文）"
source_tier: "t2"
url: "https://arxiv.org/abs/2611.05220v1"
permalink: "https://feed.astralor.com/items/itm_a9ca6f3cfa699712b7ea00ed"
published: "2026-11-03T17:05:45.000Z"
score: 63
channel: "ai"
tags: ["多模态","Fusing Earth","Flood","HWM","DEM","Deep-learning","USGS HWM"]
---

# Fusing Earth observation embeddings and spaceborne terrain with meteorological forcing for flood peak depth prediction from high-water marks

## At a glance

Flood peak depth on normally dry land governs damage and risk to life, but is observed only sparsely, by post-event high-water mark (HWM) surveys, and depth derived from satellite flood extent is produced after the even…

## Key points

- Flood peak depth on normally dry land governs damage and risk to life, but is observed only sparsely, by post-event high-water mark (HWM) surveys, and depth derived from satellite flood extent is produced after the even…
- Deep-learning flood models have in turn been trained on hydrodynamic simulations rather than on observed depths.
- We ask whether flood peak depth can be learned from field observations and predicted before the peak from spaceborne terrain, geospatial foundation-model embeddings and antecedent meteorological forcing.

## Full text

Flood peak depth on normally dry land governs damage and risk to life, but is observed only sparsely, by post-event high-water mark (HWM) surveys, and depth derived from satellite flood extent is produced after the event and inherits the vertical error of the digital elevation model (DEM) it is computed from. Deep-learning flood models have in turn been trained on hydrodynamic simulations rather than on observed depths. We ask whether flood peak depth can be learned from field observations and predicted before the peak from spaceborne terrain, geospatial foundation-model embeddings and antecedent meteorological forcing. We assembled 5689 USGS HWM surveys from 39 events (2011-2025) in 24 U.S. states and Puerto Rico, assigned each a peak time from nearby sensors, paired each with a rain-free window at the same site, and linked them to Copernicus GLO-30 terrain, AlphaEarth embeddings and 144 h of hourly forcing masked to the lead time. A cross-modal fusion network trained on these observations predicts depth at the surveyed marks with a mean absolute error of 0.39 m 6 h ahead of the peak. Supervision by surveyed depth corrects the DEM error implicitly: differencing the measured peak water level with the same DEM gives 0.93 m at the same marks, 2.4 times larger, although it uses the measured water level and the model does not. Forcing accounts for 77% of the attributed reduction in depth error; terrain and the embeddings are statistically equivalent to each other and contribute the remaining 23%. On eleven held-out events the model still separates flooded from rain-free conditions but no longer resolves depth at the marks (R2 = 0.03), so the skill reported here is confined to the events and regions sampled. Field-surveyed depths can thus supervise flood depth prediction and correct terrain error that extent-based estimation cannot, while transfer to unseen storms remains the open problem.

---

Verify against the original before citing; curated by Astral Feed: https://feed.astralor.com/items/itm_a9ca6f3cfa699712b7ea00ed