Delineation of precipitation regions in two Canadian study areas: the role of the temporal resolution of the precipitation data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The identification of homogeneous precipitation regions has value in many water resources engineering applications (infrastructure planning, design, operations; climate forecasting, modelling). The objective of this paper is to assess the sensitivity of precipitation regions to the temporal resolution (monthly, seasonal, annual and the annual maximum series) of the data. The presented method uses the fuzzy c-means clustering algorithm to partition climate sites into statistically homogeneous precipitation regions. The regions are validated using an approach based on L-moment statistics. The method is conducted in two climatically different study areas in western and eastern Canada. There does not appear to be a relationship between the spatial distributions of the regions formed using different temporal resolutions of the precipitation data. It is recommended to delineate precipitation regions that are specific to the task at hand, and to select a temporal resolution that is consistent with the final application of the regional precipitation dataset.EDITOR A. Castellarin; ASSOCIATE EDITOR T. Kjeldsen
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".