MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1845010849 · doi:10.1029/2011wr011323

Nonparametric methods for drought severity estimation at ungauged sites

2012· article· en· W1845010849 on OpenAlexaffabout
Sara Sadri, Donald H. Burn

Bibliographic record

VenueWater Resources Research · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrology and Drought Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsJackknife resamplingQuantileArtificial neural networkStatisticsSupport vector machineNonparametric statisticsQuantile regressionRegressionFrequency analysisComputer scienceMathematicsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The objective in frequency analysis is, given extreme events such as drought severity or duration, to estimate the relationship between that event and the associated return periods at a catchment. Neural networks and other artificial intelligence approaches in function estimation and regression analysis are relatively new techniques in engineering, providing an attractive alternative to traditional statistical models. There are, however, few applications of neural networks and support vector machines in the area of severity quantile estimation for drought frequency analysis. In this paper, we compare three methods for this task: multiple linear regression, radial basis function neural networks, and least squares support vector regression (LS‐SVR). The area selected for this study includes 32 catchments in the Canadian Prairies. From each catchment drought severities are extracted and fitted to a Pearson type III distribution, which act as observed values. For each method‐duration pair, we use a jackknife algorithm to produce estimated values at each site. The results from these three approaches are compared and analyzed, and it is found that LS‐SVR provides the best quantile estimates and extrapolating capacity.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.061
GPT teacher head0.401
Teacher spread0.339 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations46
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWater Resources ResearchSame topicHydrology and Drought AnalysisFrench-language works237,207