Comparative Analysis of Short Time Increment Urban Precipitation Characteristics
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.125 | 0.002 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it