Espacialização da precipitação pluviométrica trimestral em São Paulo Capital
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
The most appropriate representation in the rain is the spatial layout of isohyets, which are curves that connect points of equal height of precipitation for a given period. The aim of this study was to analyze the quarterly spatial distribution of rainfall in the territorial area of São Paulo. This data is interpolated, using the function Top to Raster ARCGIS producing surface maps to show areas of the county with the highest and lowest monthly and annual rainfall volume. For the first quarter (January to March), the wettest in São Paulo, the average rainfall reaches 773mm in the South / Southeast. In the second quarter the average maximum rainfall observed in the South / Southeast, reaches 378mm, 280mm in the third quarter and finally, in the fourth quarter obtained a maximum rainfall in the area of 526mm. The damper quarter, the first (662,7mm), followed by the fourth quarter (448,8mm), second quarter (218,9mm) and, finally, the drier is the third quarter (165,1mm). It was concluded in this spatial distribution study of the total quarterly precipitate in São Paulo that the largest volumes of rainfall is concentrated in the south / south-east of the municipal area, and in the last quarter (October to December) is also observed volumes close to observed in the South / Southeast also in the North and East.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 it