Bibliographic record
Abstract
Systematic and software-supported framework that enables repeatable workflows for both stationary flood frequency analysis (S-FFA) and nonstationary FFA (NS-FFA). The framework has three modules to a) process flood series for exploratory data analysis (EDA) and NS-FFA model determination (if needed), b) select the S-FFA or NS-FFA approach underpinned by the EDA, and c) perform FFA including model determination, parameter estimation, uncertainty quantification, and model performance assessment. The framework incorporates various distributions, methods, and metrics, and recent advancements in NS-FFA for model determination and uncertainty quantification and allows for the modeller's intervention while ensuring reproducibility. The software is freely available to the public. Please cite as: Vidrio-Sahagún, C. T., Ruschkowski, J., He, J., Pietroniro, A. (2024). A practice-oriented framework for stationary and nonstationary flood frequency analysis. Environmental Modelling & Software, 105940, ISSN 1364-8152, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsoft.2024.105940
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 | 0.005 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.139 | 0.091 |
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".