ArticleEnvironmetrics2025
Assessing predictability of environmental time series with statistical and machine learning models.
Article in Environmetrics, 2025. 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
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The ever increasing popularity of machine learning methods in virtually all areas of science, engineering and beyond is poised to put established statistical modeling approaches into question. Environmental statistics is no exception, as popular constructs such as neural networks and decision trees are now routinely used to provide forecasts of physical processes ranging from air pollution to meteorology. This presents both challenges and opportunities to the statistical community, which could contribute to the machine learning literature with a model-based approach with formal uncertainty quantification. Should, however, classical statistical methodologies be discarded altogether in environmental statistics, and should our contribution be focused on formalizing machine learning constructs? This work aims at providing some answers to this thought-provoking question with two time series case studies where selected models from both the statistical and machine learning literature are compared in terms of forecasting skills, uncertainty quantification and computational time. Relative merits of both class of approaches are discussed, and broad open questions are formulated as a baseline for a discussion on the topic.
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.