MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2113485156 · doi:10.5539/jsd.v3n1p159

Determining suitable probability distribution models for annual precipitation data (a case study of Mazandaran and Golestan provinces)

2010· article· en· W2113485156 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mohammad Mahdavi, Khaled Osati, Sayed Ali Naghi Sadeghi, Bakhtiar Karimi, Jalil Mobaraki

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Sustainable Development · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrology and Drought Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of Tehran
KeywordsGumbel distributionStatisticsPrecipitationMathematicsDistribution (mathematics)Series (stratigraphy)Pearson product-moment correlation coefficientData seriesFrequency distributionResidualGeographyEconometricsExtreme value theoryMeteorologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Statistical distributions can be used for data development in shortage data situations, as in many part of Iran station. The aims of this study are select the best frequency distribution to estimate average annual precipitation and assess the effects of data length on the selection of suitable distribution. Therefore 65 stations data of Mazandaran and Golestan provinces were analyzed. Relative residual mean square (RMS) was used to determine the best fitted distribution to any annual series and precipitation was estimated for different return periods. Relative frequency of first classes of fitted distributions showed that normal and Pearson distributions decreased and Gumbel distribution had more fitness with data series by increasing statistical period length. The best-fitted distribution is Pearson with 15-year data; log Pearson for 20, 25 and 30-year periods. Based on Moment method and total given scores, two-parameter normal distribution has the best fitness in all statistical periods.

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 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)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.444
Threshold uncertainty score0.340

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.247 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations27
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Sustainable DevelopmentSame topicHydrology and Drought AnalysisFrench-language works237,207