MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3192890627 · doi:10.2166/wst.2021.304

Best-fit probability distribution models for monthly rainfall of Northeastern Brazil

2021· article· en· W3192890627 on OpenAlexaff
Patrícia de Souza Medeiros Pina Ximenes, Antônio Samuel Alves da Silva, Fahim Ashkar, Tatijana Stošić

Bibliographic record

VenueWater Science & Technology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrology and Drought Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Moncton
FundersCoordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior
KeywordsGumbel distributionWeibull distributionPrecipitationGeneralized Pareto distributionStatisticStatisticsMathematicsGompertz functionEnvironmental scienceEconometricsGeographyMeteorologyExtreme value theory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The analysis of precipitation data is extremely important for strategic planning and decision-making in various natural systems, as well as in planning and preparing for a drought period. The drought is responsible for several impacts on the economy of Northeast Brazil (NEB), mainly in the agricultural and livestock sectors. This study analyzed the fit of 2-parameter distributions gamma (GAM), log-normal (LNORM), Weibull (WEI), generalized Pareto (GP), Gumbel (GUM) and normal (NORM) to monthly precipitation data from 293 rainfall stations across NEB, in the period 1988-2017. The maximum likelihood (ML) method was used to estimate the parameters to fit the models and the selection of the model was based on a modification of the Shapiro-Wilk statistic. The results showed the chosen 2-parameter distributions to be flexible enough to describe the studied monthly precipitation data. The GAM and WEI models showed the overall best fits, but the LNORM and GP models gave the best fits in certain months of the year and regions that differed from the others in terms of their average precipitation.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.036
Threshold uncertainty score0.071

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.226 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations22
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWater Science & TechnologySame topicHydrology and Drought AnalysisFrench-language works237,207