MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387532887 · doi:10.55766/sujst-2023-04-e01485

ROBUST EXTREME RETURN LEVEL WITH POWER NORMALIZATION FOR EXTREME EVENTS: APPLICATION OF REAL HYDROLOGY DATA

2023· article· en· W4387532887 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Abdellah Belhajjam, Belbachir Mohammadine, Saad Elouardirhi

Bibliographic record

VenueSuranaree Journal of Science and Technology · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEnergy Load and Power Forecasting
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNormalization (sociology)Multiplicative functionExtreme value theoryLinear modelReturn periodMathematicsStatistical inferenceStatisticsEconometricsGeneralized linear modelGeneralized extreme value distributionConfidence intervalApplied mathematicsGeographyMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In statistical studies of rare and catastrophic phenomena the distribution of generalized extreme values under linear normalization is always chosen as the appropriate model. It used to estimate the probabilities of events that have not yet been observed. Recently, the extreme value theory (EVT) received a lot of attention both theoretically and practically using just the classical linear model (L-Model) or linear normalization of the maximum to estimate return level. So, in this paper we propose a new multiplicative model based on the distribution of generalized extreme values under non-linear normalization, whose purpose is to raise the strong and weak points between these two models. Our main goal is to use our multiplicative model (P-model) to calculate the return level, as well as the associated confidence interval. The diagnostic fit, test and statistical inference to compare the two models (linear and non-linear) are studied. Finally, a data analysis and discussion are applied at first on real hydrological data for Morocco and South of Australia, then on water levels of lake Erié in Canada. The results show that our multiplicative (non-linear) model is more adaptive because it takes into account the variation of the return period.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.829
Threshold uncertainty score0.262

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.070
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.178 · 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 teacher head, 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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSuranaree Journal of Science and TechnologySame topicEnergy Load and Power ForecastingFrench-language works237,207