MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401792547 · doi:10.1002/cjs.11829

Fast and scalable inference for spatial extreme value models

2024· article· en· W4401792547 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Meixi Chen, Reza Ramezan, Martin Lysy

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Statistics · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicSpatial and Panel Data Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsInferenceComputer scienceScalabilityValue (mathematics)Artificial intelligenceMachine learningDatabase

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The generalized extreme value (GEV) distribution is a popular model for analyzing and forecasting extreme weather data. To increase prediction accuracy, spatial information is often pooled via a latent Gaussian process (GP) on the GEV parameters. Inference for GEV‐GP models is typically carried out using Markov Chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) methods, or using approximate inference methods such as the integrated nested Laplace approximation (INLA). However, MCMC becomes prohibitively slow as the number of spatial locations increases, whereas INLA is applicable in practice only to a limited subset of GEV‐GP models. In this article, we revisit the original Laplace approximation for fitting spatial GEV models. In combination with a popular sparsity‐inducing spatial covariance approximation technique, we show through simulations that our approach accurately estimates the Bayesian predictive distribution of extreme weather events, is scalable to several thousand spatial locations, and is several orders of magnitude faster than MCMC. A case study in forecasting extreme snowfall across Canada is presented.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.024
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.064

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.024
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.074
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.155 · 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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of StatisticsSame topicSpatial and Panel Data AnalysisFrench-language works237,207