Discrimination between a group of three-parameter distributions for hydro-meteorological frequency modeling
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We recommend methods of discrimination between some three-parameter distributions used in hydro-meteorological frequency modeling. Discriminations are between model pairs belonging to the group (generalized extreme value (GEV), Pearson Type III (P3), generalized logistic (GLO)). To assess the fit of these distributions to data, the Akaike information criterion, Bayesian information criterion, and (or) goodness-of-fit measures are commonly employed. However, it is difficult to estimate the discrimination power and bias of these methods when used with three-parameter distributions. Consequently, we propose two alternative tools and assess their performance. Both tools are based on a sample transformation to normality followed by applying a powerful statistic for testing normality, such as the Shapiro-Wilk or the probability plot correlation coefficient statistic. While arriving at recommendations for discriminating between the (GEV, GLO) and (P3, GLO) pairs of models, we show that the discrimination power between the P3 and GEV distributions can be rather low.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.017 | 0.059 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".