MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Return Periods of Extreme Events in the Changing Climate: LEYP Model

2023· article· en· W4386986716 on OpenAlexafffund
Mahesh D. Pandey, S. Mercier

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicProbabilistic and Robust Engineering Design
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsReturn periodClimate changeExtreme weatherEnvironmental scienceReliability (semiconductor)EconometricsComputer scienceExtreme value theoryPaceClimate modelStochastic processPoisson distributionClimatologyMathematicsStatisticsGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A rapid pace of climate change is now becoming evident by a marked increase in the frequency and intensity of weather extremes, and this trend is expected to continue with an increase in global warming in the coming decades.The paper presents the linear extension of the Yule process (LEYP) as a general stochastic model of environmental hazards induced by non-stationary climate conditions.The LEYP is a more versatile model than the Poisson process, as it can incorporate dependence among events occurring over time.In the paper, explicit expressions have been derived for the return period, a traditional measure of reliability that is commonly used in the design of infrastructure systems.Unlike the stationary climate, the return period between extreme events would continue to decrease as climate change effects would become more pronounced in the future.Examples presented in the paper demonstrate that a modest degree of statistical dependence among events leads to a significant reduction in the return period, i.e., a remarkable increase in the frequency of extreme events.Therefore, existing design codes would need to be revised to accommodate such non-stationary changes to ensure a high level of safety of infrastructure systems in the changing climate.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.219
GPT teacher head0.360
Teacher spread0.141 · 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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicProbabilistic and Robust Engineering DesignFrench-language works237,207