Comparison of different statistical downscaling models and future projection of areal mean precipitation of a river basin under climate change effect
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Investigation of the hydrological impacts of climate change at the local scale requires the use of a statistical downscaling technique. In order to use the output of a Global Circulation Model (GCM), a downscaling technique is used. In this study, statistical downscaling of monthly areal mean precipitation in the Göksun River basin in Turkey was carried out using the Group Method of Data Handling (GMDH), Support Vector Machine (SVM) and Gene Expression Programming (GEP) techniques. Large-scale weather factors were used for the basin with a monthly areal mean precipitation (PM) record from 1971 to 2000 used for training and testing periods. The R2-value for precipitation in the SVM, GEP and GMDH models are 0.62, 0.59, and 0.6 respectively, for the testing periods. The results show that SVM has the best model performance of the three proposed downscaling models, however, the GEP model has the lowest AIC value. The simulated results for the Canadian GCM3 (CGCM3) A1B and A2 scenarios show a similarity in their average precipitation prediction. Generally, both these scenarios anticipate a decrease in the average monthly precipitation during the simulated periods. Therefore, the results of the future projections show that mean precipitation might decrease during the period of 2021–2100.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".