Accuracy of Local Knowledge in Prediction Seasonal Weather: Empirical Evidence from North eastern Nigeria
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Over the years, West African Sahel’s people developed some strategies for predicting the seasonal weather using meteorological indicators to plan for extreme weather events. This study used information on local indicators of seasonal weather prediction and mean monthly rainfall and temperature record (1981-2017) from Nguru weather station located at Latitude 14°N in achieving the aim of the study. Both qualitative and quantitate (descriptive and inferential) statistical tools were employed in analysing the collected data. The study found that the local population of the study area used meteorological indicators in predicting the seasonal weather. The results of the analysis revealed that the variability of the annual rainfall during the study period was large. An increasing trend of 3.1mm annually was observed. While decreasing trend in the cold, dry and hot dry season temperature and an increasing trend in warm moist temperature by 0.025°C, 0.05°C and 0.0004°C respectively, was observed. Annual rainfall amount accounts for 31% and 2% variability in cold dry and warm moist season temperature, respectively. Cold, dry season and warm moist season temperature respond to any 1mm increase in annual rainfall by decreasing by 0.012°C and 0.002°C, respectively. The Hot, dry season temperature also accounts for 4% of the variability in annual rainfall. The model’s result revealed anyone 1°C increase in hot dry season temperature lowers the annual rainfall by 10mm. This study confirmed that the observed relationship between seasons weather conditions by local population exist. Therefore annual rainfall is the major determinant of cold dry seasonal temperature in the study area.
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 | 0.002 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".