MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2144787999 · doi:10.5539/mas.v7n12p78

Assessment of Risk of Rainfall Events with a Hybrid of ARFIMA-GARCH

2013· article· en· W2144787999 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ibrahim Lawal Kane, Fadhilah Yusof

Bibliographic record

VenueModern Applied Science · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrology and Drought Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAutoregressive fractionally integrated moving averageAutocorrelationPersistence (discontinuity)Environmental scienceClimatologyAutoregressive conditional heteroskedasticityProxy (statistics)EconometricsLandslideMoving averageSeries (stratigraphy)Flooding (psychology)Volatility (finance)MathematicsStatisticsGeologyLong memory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Hazardous situations related to rainfall events can be due to very intense rainfall, or to the persistence of rainfall over a long period of time. Such events may result to an exceedence of the capacity of drainage systems resulting in the heap of basements which may lead to landslides and flooding. This study assesses the persistence dependence of rainfall time series of Chui Chak, a station in Peninsular Malaysia that observed the highest rainfall event for the period 01/01/1975-31/12/2008. The persistence dependence of the rainfall time series was modelled via fractional ARIMA model augmented with the GARCH model. The Ljung-Box test for testing autocorrelation proves that the combined ARFIMA-GARCH model captures the temporal persistence behaviour in the Chui Chak rainfall time series data with persistence measure 0.839. This measure represents a relatively lasting persistence, that is, the process variability should return to the historical average after a relatively long period of time which may have a risk of extreme event.

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)0.001
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 score0.516
Threshold uncertainty score0.712

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.222 · 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

Citations12
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueModern Applied ScienceSame topicHydrology and Drought AnalysisFrench-language works237,207