Generalized autoregressive conditional heteroscedasticity modelling of hydrologic time series
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The existence of time‐dependent variance or conditional variance, commonly called heteroscedasticity, in hydrologic time series has not been thoroughly investigated. This paper deals with modelling the heteroscedasticity in the residuals of the seasonal autoregressive integrated moving average (SARIMA) model using a generalized autoregressive conditional heteroscedasticity (GARCH) model. The model is applied to two monthly rainfall time series from humid and arid regions. The effect of Box–Cox transformation and seasonal differencing on the remaining seasonal heteroscedasticity in the residuals of the SARIMA model is also investigated. It is shown that the seasonal heteroscedasticity in the residuals of the SARIMA model can be removed using Box–Cox transformation along with seasonal differencing for the humid region rainfall. On the other hand, transformation and seasonal differencing could not remove heteroscedasticity from the residuals of the SARIMA model fitted to rainfall data in the arid region. Therefore, the GARCH modelling approach is necessary to capture the heteroscedasticity remaining in the residuals of a SARIMA model. However, the evaluation criteria do not necessarily show that the GARCH model improves the performance of the SARIMA model. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".