MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Bivariate flood frequency analysis: Part 1. Determination of marginals by parametric and nonparametric techniques

2008· article· en· W1559665021 on OpenAlex
Subhankar Karmakar, Slobodan P. Simonović

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Flood Risk Management · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrology and Drought Analysis
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNonparametric statisticsMarginal distributionFlood mythBivariate analysisParametric statisticsMathematicsStatisticsRandom variableGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In flood frequency analysis, a flood event is mainly characterized by peak flow, volume and duration. These three variables or characteristics of floods are random in nature and mutually correlated. In this article, an effort is made to find out appropriate marginal distribution of the flood characteristics considering a set of parametric and nonparametric distributions, and further mathematically model the correlated nature among them. A set of parametric distribution functions and nonparametric methods based on kernel density estimation and orthonormal series are used to determine the marginal distribution functions for peak flow, volume and duration. In conventional methods of flood frequency analysis, the marginal distribution functions of peak flow, volume and duration are assumed to follow some specific parametric distribution function. The present work performs a better selection of marginal distribution functions for flood characteristics as both parametric and nonparametric estimation procedures are extensively followed. The methodology is demonstrated with 70‐year stream flow data of Red River at Grand Forks of North Dakota, USA.

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.

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.062
Threshold uncertainty score0.574

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.216 · 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