Characterizing extreme rainfalls and constructing confidence intervals for <scp>IDF</scp> curves using <scp>Scaling‐GEV</scp> distribution model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This article compares the performances of three fitting methods (SLmom, S1NCM, and S3NCM) to account for temporal characteristics of Annual Maximum Precipitations (AMPs) on daily and sub‐daily time scales using scaling General Extreme Value (GEV) distribution at a local site. Based on simple scaling properties of AMPs, the temporal downscaling model (called Scaling‐GEV) with parameter estimation methods are used to estimate sub‐daily AMPs from observed daily data. The feasibility and accuracy of the suggested method were assessed using rainfall data available from Dorval in Quebec (Canada) and Seoul (South Korea) for the period 1961–1990. Presence of simple scaling properties of AMPs for two stations has shown that it is feasible to use the temporal downscaling method for describing the linkage between AMPs of different time scales. Numerical and graphical analyses revealed that the Scaling‐GEV distribution by the Three‐Non central moments (NCM) method (S3NCM) provides the most accurate estimates compared to observed data amongst three fitting methods. In addition, this study suggested a modified bootstrap technique to determine confidence intervals (CIs) CIs of extreme rainfall series using the simple scaling properties of extreme rainfalls and only daily AMPs. Although the CIs were constructed by only daily AMPs and the simple scaling properties, the observed sub‐daily AMPs are generally within the 95% CI estimated.
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 | 0.012 | 0.056 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".