MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2114092542 · doi:10.3390/cli3030727

Linear and Non-Linear Approaches for Statistical Seasonal Rainfall Forecast in the Sirba Watershed Region (SAHEL)

2015· article· en· W2114092542 on OpenAlexaff
Abdouramane Gado Djibo, Harouna Karambiri, Ousmane Seidou, Ketvara Sittichok, Nathalie Philippon, Jean‐Emmanuel Paturel, Hadiza Moussa Saley

Bibliographic record

VenueClimate · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicClimate variability and models
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPredictabilityWatershedLinear regressionLinear modelEnvironmental scienceForecast skillPrincipal component analysisStatisticsPopulationSeasonalityLinear correlationClimatologyPredictive powerMathematicsEconometricsMeteorologyComputer scienceGeographyMachine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Since the 90s, several studies were conducted to evaluate the predictability of the Sahelian rainy season and propose seasonal rainfall forecasts to help stakeholders to take the adequate decisions to adapt with the predicted situation. Unfortunately, two decades later, the forecasting skills remains low and forecasts have a limited value for decision making while the population is still suffering from rainfall interannual variability: this shows the limit of commonly used predictors and forecast approaches for this region. Thus, this paper developed and tested new predictors and new approaches to predict the upcoming seasonal rainfall amount over the Sirba watershed. Predictors selected through a linear correlation analysis were further processed using combined linear methods to identify those having high predictive power. Seasonal rainfall was forecasted using a set of linear and non-linear models. An average lag time up to eight months was obtained for all models. It is found that the combined linear methods performed better than non-linear, possibly because non-linear models require larger and better datasets for calibration. The R2, Nash and Hit rate score are respectively 0.53, 0.52, and 68% for the combined linear approach; and 0.46, 0.45, 61% for non-linear principal component analysis.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.037

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.113
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.168 · 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
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

Citations20
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClimateSame topicClimate variability and modelsFrench-language works237,207