The legacy of STAHY: milestones, achievements, challenges, and open problems in statistical hydrology
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Statistical tools are crucial for a variety of hydrological applications, whether to model processes and enhance understanding and knowledge or to design infrastructure systems. Given the rapid evolution of statistical methods and the need for a solid theoretical foundation for their correct application, a multidisciplinary community STAtistics in HYdrology Working Group (STAHY-WG) aggregated under the International Association of Hydrological Sciences (IAHS) umbrella to contribute to this research field. Now, more than 15 years since its inception, this paper summarizes the main achievements of this productive community collaboration in four (of many) branches of statistical hydrology: extreme value analysis, multivariate analysis, time series analysis, and regionalization. The aim is to provide an overview of recent developments, offer practical suggestions (e.g. software packages), and outline future challenges to support scientists and practitioners in their endeavours within the realm of statistical hydrology studies.
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 | 0.046 | 0.060 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.015 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.014 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
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".