Nonlinear response of precipitation to climate indices using a non‐stationary Poisson‐generalized Pareto model: case study of southeastern Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Quantile estimates are generally interpreted in association with the return period concept in practical engineering. To do so with the peaks‐over‐threshold (POT) approach, combined Poisson‐generalized Pareto distributions (referred to as PD‐GPD model) must be considered. In this article, we evaluate the incorporation of non‐stationarity in the generalized Pareto distribution (GPD) and the Poisson distribution (PD) using, respectively, the smoothing‐based B‐spline functions and the logarithmic link function. Two models are proposed, a stationary PD combined to a non‐stationary GPD (referred to as PD0‐GPD1) and a combined non‐stationary PD and GPD (referred to as PD1‐GPD1). The teleconnections between hydro‐climatological variables and a number of large‐scale climate patterns allow using these climate indices as covariates in the development of non‐stationary extreme value models. The case study is made with daily precipitation amount time series from southeastern Canada and two climatic covariates, the Arctic Oscillation (AO) and the Pacific North American (PNA) indices. A comparison of PD0‐GPD1 and PD1‐GPD1 models showed that the incorporation of non‐stationarity in both POT models instead of solely in the GPD has an effect on the estimated quantiles. The use of the B‐spline function as link function between the GPD parameters and the considered climatic covariates provided flexible non‐stationary PD‐GPD models. Indeed, linear and nonlinear conditional quantiles are observed at various stations in the case study, opening an interesting perspective for further research on the physical mechanism behind these simple and complex interactions.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".