Assessing the performance of daily to subdaily temporal disaggregation methods for the IDF curve generation under climate change
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Given the short concentration time in urban watersheds, the design of municipal water infrastructures often requires knowledge of sub-daily precipitation intensity. Sub-daily time series can be directly used in a rainfall–runoff model or to derive intensity–duration–frequency (IDF) curves and calculate the design precipitation. Given that precipitation projections are typically at a daily time scale, temporal disaggregation using techniques of variable complexity is often needed to evaluate the risk/performance of urban infrastructure in the future. This paper proposes a simple steady-state stochastic disaggregation model that generates wet/dry day occurrence using a binomial distribution and precipitation intensity using an exponential distribution. Daily precipitation data from four regional climate models (RCMs) forced with the high-emission scenario representative concentration pathway (RCP 8.5) were downscaled using the quantile mapping (QM) method. The performance of the developed method is compared to widely used temporal disaggregation methods, namely, the multiplicative random cascade model (MRC), the Hurst–Kolmogorov process (HKP), and three versions of the K-nearest neighbour (KNN) model, using the Kolmogorov–Smirnov (KS) test. The six disaggregation techniques were assessed at four stations in the South Nation River Watershed in Eastern Ontario, Canada. Results indicate that, despite its simplicity, the proposed method performed well compared to other temporal disaggregation methods when resampling the observed extreme 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 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 | 0.004 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".