MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4385705670 · doi:10.1007/s00477-023-02518-w

Stationary and non-stationary temperature-duration-frequency curves for Australia

2023· article· en· W4385705670 on OpenAlexaff
Orpita U. Laz, Ataur Rahman, Taha B. M. J. Ouarda, Nasreen Jahan

Bibliographic record

VenueStochastic Environmental Research and Risk Assessment · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicClimate variability and models
Canadian institutionsInstitut National de la Recherche Scientifique
FundersNational Oceanic and Atmospheric AdministrationWestern Sydney University
KeywordsAkaike information criterionDuration (music)Extreme value theoryEnvironmental scienceClimatologyClimate changeEconometricsGeneralized extreme value distributionStatisticsAdaptation (eye)MeteorologyExtreme heatStationary processCovariateMathematicsGeographyGeologyPhysicsOceanography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Australian summer heat events have become more frequent and severe in recent times. Temperature-duration-frequency (TDF) curves connect the severity of heat episodes of various durations to their frequencies and thus can be an effective tool for analysing the heat extremes. This study examines Australian heat events using data from 82 meteorological stations. TDF curves have been developed under stationary and non-stationary conditions. Generalised Extreme Value (GEV) distribution is considered to estimate extreme temperatures for return periods of 2, 5, 10, 25, 50 and 100 years. Three major climate drivers for Australia have been considered as potential covariates along with Time to develop the non-stationary TDF curves. According to the Akaike information criterion, the non-stationary framework for TDF modelling provides a better fit to the data than its stationary equivalent. The findings can be beneficial in offering new information to aid climate adaptation and mitigation at the regional level in Australia.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score0.056

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.377
Teacher spread0.327 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations5
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStochastic Environmental Research and Risk AssessmentSame topicClimate variability and modelsFrench-language works237,207