MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2562559905 · doi:10.1515/biol-2016-0057

A best-fit probability distribution for the estimation of rainfall in northern regions of Pakistan

2016· article· en· W2562559905 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen Life Sciences · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrology and Drought Analysis
Canadian institutionsAbbott (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGumbel distributionStatisticsProbability distributionGoodness of fitDistribution (mathematics)Normal distributionAnderson–Darling testMathematicsLog-normal distributionKolmogorov–Smirnov testStatistical hypothesis testingExtreme value theory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This study was designed to find the best-fit probability distribution of annual maximum rainfall based on a twenty-four-hour sample in the northern regions of Pakistan using four probability distributions: normal, log-normal, log-Pearson type-III and Gumbel max. Based on the scores of goodness of fit tests, the normal distribution was found to be the best-fit probability distribution at the Mardan rainfall gauging station. The log-Pearson type-III distribution was found to be the best-fit probability distribution at the rest of the rainfall gauging stations. The maximum values of expected rainfall were calculated using the best-fit probability distributions and can be used by design engineers in future research.

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.

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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.216
Threshold uncertainty score0.721

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 studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.280 · 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