Validation of log logistic distribution to model water demand using UK and North American data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There is a general assumption that potable water consumption is stochastic in nature with increasing in recognition of the need to allow for this when planning, designing or assessing the performance of water distribution systems. The stochastic nature of water demand is best addressed by fitting water demand into a suitable probability distribution. It is often assumed that variations in water demands follow a normal distribution without adequate justification. However, there had been insufficient studies previously to conclude the suitability of the appropriate probability distribution functions in modelling water demand. The purpose of this study is to validate an appropriate probability density function to apply in simulating water demand using real water consumption data. Daily water consumption data for five years obtained from a water company in Canada and four years for UK are analysed using normal, log normal, log logistic and Weibull distributions and a comparison on the applicability of each distribution was assessed. Statistical modelling was performed using MINITAB. The Anderson Darling (AD) statistic was used as the goodness of fit parameter in the analysis.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".