MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3013027332 · doi:10.13016/m2pk07539

Using Historical Data for Retrospective Prediction of Rainfall In the Midwest

2018· article· en· W3013027332 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ephraim Alfa, Huiyi Chen, Kristen J. Hansen, Mathew Prindle, Sai K. Popuri, Nadeesri Wijekoon, Kofi P. Adragni, Amita Mehta

Bibliographic record

VenueMaryland Shared Open Access Repository (USMAI Consortium) · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrology and Drought Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Security AgencyCentre International de Recherche sur le CancerUniversity of Maryland, Baltimore CountyU.S. Department of DefenseNational Science Foundation
KeywordsClimatologyGeographyComputer scienceGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Missouri River Basin (MRB) is an important food-producing region in the United States and Canada. Climate variability and water availability affect crops production in this region. Past climate data have been recorded at various locations in the basin over a period of ten years. We use the data for a retrospective prediction of rainfall. As the dimension of the data is relatively large, a sufficient dimension reduction approach is used to reduce the dimensionality of the data while preserving the regression information pertinent to rainfall. We use the nascent dimension reduction methodology called Minimum Average Deviance Estimation or MADE to reduce the dimensionality of the climate data. Since MADE is still a tool in development, we explored two of its intrinsic prediction methods and compared them to the Nadaraya-Watson prediction approach by a cross-validation. A parallel implementation of MADE and its prediction methods on a high performance computer were carried out. A performance study was performed along with the application of the best prediction method to the MRB climate data.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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 score0.053
Threshold uncertainty score0.106

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.122
GPT teacher head0.362
Teacher spread0.240 · 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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMaryland Shared Open Access Repository (USMAI Consortium)Same topicHydrology and Drought AnalysisFrench-language works237,207