MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7081973199 · doi:10.11159/icceia25.126

Assessment of Extreme Rainfall in Chiang Mai Utilizing the ACER Method

2025· article· en· W7081973199 on OpenAlexvenueno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the World Congress on New Technologies · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicGeochemistry and Geologic Mapping
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersChiang Mai University
KeywordsChiang maiAltitude (triangle)PrecipitationVegetation (pathology)Field (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Extreme rainfall is customarily utilized as fundamental data in the design of hydraulic structures.The precision of rainfall estimation corresponding to the return periods is crucial for the economic viability, structural integrity, and safety of such designs.Traditionally, a range of classical extreme value (EV) models are employed to facilitate the estimation of extreme rainfall events.The objective of the present study is to employ the average conditional exceedance rate (ACER) method for the purpose of estimating extreme rainfall patterns in Chiang Mai, Thailand.The ACER method is conventionally applied to derive extreme values from time series data and is typically employed in the field of ocean research.In this research, long-term rainfall data from 1999 to 2022 were collected from rainfall gauge stations managed by the Meteorological Department of Thailand.The results conclusively demonstrate that the ACER method yields highly consistent estimations of extreme rainfall.Consequently, these estimations hold significant relevance for informing the design and construction of hydraulic structures.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.026
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.270 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the World Congress on New TechnologiesSame topicGeochemistry and Geologic MappingFrench-language works237,207