MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1565086941 · doi:10.1029/sp004p0090

Comparative Analysis of Short Time Increment Urban Precipitation Characteristics

2011· book-chapter· en· W1565086941 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
A. Ramachandra Rao, B. T. Chenchayya

Bibliographic record

VenueSpecial publications · 2011
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrology and Drought Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPrecipitationStormEnvironmental scienceNova scotiaClimatologyMeteorologyAtmospheric sciencesGeographyGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Some of the preliminary results obtained in a comparative analysis of short time increment rainfall characteristics observed in stations located in different climatic zones are presented in this paper. Such an analysis gives better insight to the characterization of short time increment rainfall processes. The probability distributions fitted to the storm (wet) durations and durations of dry periods are considered. The probability distributions fitted to the data from Boston, Mass., Tucson, Ariz., St. Johnsbury, Vt., Truro, Nova Scotia, Ely, Nev., and West Lafayette, Ind. are analyzed. The transition rate functions, the transition probabilities, the probabilities of storm age and of storm end states are compared. Secondly, the depth-duration relationships of the precipitation characteristics observed in some of the stations mentioned above are compared. It is found that some of the characteristics, such as the probability distributions of durations of wet periods in Boston, W. Lafayette, and St. Johnsbury are similar to each other although these stations are located in different climatic zones. In the same vein, the probability distributions of durations of dry periods are found to be close to each other for the data from Tucson, Ely and West Lafayette and Boston. The depth-duration relationships are found to be considerably different for many of these stations.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.226 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSpecial publicationsSame topicHydrology and Drought AnalysisFrench-language works237,207