MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2403938721 · doi:10.1061/9780784479858.049

Analysis of Low Streamflow Characteristics: Application to Some Canadian Hydrometric Data

2016· article· en· W2403938721 on OpenAlexaffabout
Fahim Ashkar

Bibliographic record

VenueWorld Environmental and Water Resources Congress 2016 · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrology and Watershed Management Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Moncton
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWeibull distributionGoodness of fitStatisticsLog-normal distributionStatisticMathematicsShape parameterStreamflowGamma distributionIntensity (physics)Generalized Pareto distributionKappaEconometricsExtreme value theoryPhysicsGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The “deficit-below-threshold” (DBT) method is applied to characterize low flows in terms of volume, duration and intensity at 101 Canadian hydrometric stations. The volume, duration and intensity data series are fitted to six 2-parameter distributions, which are the generalized Pareto (gp), gamma, Weibull, log-logistic (llog), lognormal (lnorm), and kappa. The goodness of fit is assessed using the sample’s approximate transformation to normality followed by application of the Shapiro-Wilk goodness-of-fit (GoF) statistic. The gp, kappa, Weibull, and gamma distributions provide the best fits to intensity, while for volume, the lnorm, llog, and kappa distributions give the best fit. For duration, none of the 2-parameter chosen distributions is flexible enough to provide an adequate fit.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.123

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0050.009
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.191
Teacher spread0.184 · 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 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

Citations4
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWorld Environmental and Water Resources Congress 2016Same topicHydrology and Watershed Management StudiesFrench-language works237,207