Research on pattern recognition and spatial prediction method of lightning activity distribution based on cluster analysis
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Frequent lightning activity has the potential to cause damage to man-made facilities, cause forest fires and other hazards, and the prediction of lightning activity can help to avoid the occurrence of these disasters.In this paper, based on the lightning activity data of a region, the distribution pattern of lightning activity is identified at different elevations and latitudes and longitudes.Then geodetic distance and contributing nearest-neighbor similarity are introduced, and a GS-DBSCAN clustering algorithm is proposed to realize the spatial prediction of lightning activity by using the method of leastsquares fitting of prediction equations.The lightning activity directions after data clustering show topographic correlation, and the overlap between lightning activity directions and topography is about 35%.Combined with the prediction images, it is found that the lightning activity prediction results of this paper's method are closer to the real value than other algorithms, with an average offset error of less than 1.1km, an accuracy rate of >85%, and a false alarm rate of <35%, which reflects a good prediction performance.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.009 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it