4.1 Article

Fitting the distribution of dry and wet spells with alternative probability models

期刊

METEOROLOGY AND ATMOSPHERIC PHYSICS
卷 104, 期 1-2, 页码 13-27

出版社

SPRINGER WIEN
DOI: 10.1007/s00703-008-0010-7

关键词

-

资金

  1. Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia [UKM-OUPPI-34-174/318]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The development of the rainfall occurrence model is greatly important not only for data-generation purposes, but also in providing informative resources for future advancements in water-related sectors, such as water resource management and the hydrological and agricultural sectors. Various kinds of probability models had been introduced to a sequence of dry (wet) days by previous researchers in the field. Based on the probability models developed previously, the present study is aimed to propose three types of mixture distributions, namely, the mixture of two log series distributions (LSD), the mixture of the log series Poisson distribution (MLPD), and the mixture of the log series and geometric distributions (MLGD), as the alternative probability models to describe the distribution of dry (wet) spells in daily rainfall events. In order to test the performance of the proposed new models with the other nine existing probability models, 54 data sets which had been published by several authors were reanalyzed in this study. Also, the new data sets of daily observations from the six selected rainfall stations in Peninsular Malaysia for the period 1975-2004 were used. In determining the best fitting distribution to describe the observed distribution of dry (wet) spells, a Chi-square goodness-of-fit test was considered. The results revealed that the new method proposed that MLGD and MLPD showed a better fit as more than half of the data sets successfully fitted the distribution of dry and wet spells. However, the existing models, such as the truncated negative binomial and the modified LSD, were also among the successful probability models to represent the sequence of dry (wet) days in daily rainfall occurrence.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.1
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据