ArticlePeerJ2023
Estimating average wind speed in Thailand using confidence intervals for common mean of several Weibull distributions.
Article in PeerJ, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The Weibull distribution has been used to analyze data from many fields, including engineering, survival and lifetime analysis, and weather forecasting, particularly wind speed data. It is useful to measure the central tendency of wind speed data in specific locations using statistical parameters for instance the mean to accurately forecast the severity of future catastrophic events. In particular, the common mean of several independent wind speed samples collected from different locations is a useful statistic. To explore wind speed data from several areas in Surat Thani province, a large province in southern Thailand, we constructed estimates of the confidence interval for the common mean of several Weibull distributions using the Bayesian equitailed confidence interval and the highest posterior density interval using the gamma prior. Their performances are compared with those of the generalized confidence interval and the adjusted method of variance estimates recovery based on their coverage probabilities and expected lengths. The results demonstrate that when the common mean is small and the sample size is large, the Bayesian highest posterior density interval performed the best since its coverage probabilities were higher than the nominal confidence level and it provided the shortest expected lengths. Moreover, the generalized confidence interval performed well in some scenarios whereas adjusted method of variance estimates recovery did not. The approaches were used to estimate the common mean of real wind speed datasets from several areas in Surat Thani province, Thailand, fitted to Weibull distributions. These results support the simulation results in that the Bayesian methods performed the best. Hence, the Bayesian highest posterior density interval is the most appropriate method for establishing the confidence interval for the common mean of several Weibull distributions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.