Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40949830›Full record

ArticleMethodsX2025

Graphical interface for goodness-of-fit evaluation and clustering of probability distributions in environmental datasets.

Felix Reba, Toha Saifudin, Rimuljo Hendradi

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in MethodsX, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Felix RebaDoctoral Program of Mathematics and Natural Sciences, Faculty of Sciences and Technology, Universitas Airlangga, Surabaya, Indonesia.
Toha SaifudinMathematics Department, Faculty of Sciences and Technology, Universitas Airlangga, Surabaya, Indonesia.
Rimuljo HendradiInformation Systems Study Program, Faculty of Science and Technology, Universitas Airlangga, Surabaya, Indonesia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Goodness-of-Fit (GoF) tests are applied to assess the suitability of probability distributions for environmental data. However, classical methods such as Kolmogorov-Smirnov (KS) and Anderson-Darling (AD) often yield inconsistent outcomes in heterogeneous datasets. Previous studies employed clustering or mixture modeling separately, lacking integration with automated estimation and adaptive weighting. This study introduces a unified framework combining GoF evaluation, K-Means++ clustering, and a KS-weighted mixture model to enhance distribution selection. Seventeen univariate probability distributions were tested on chlorophyll concentration data from the Black Sea, with adequacy assessed via KS and AD tests and five information criteria. The framework was implemented via a MATLAB GUI to automate clustering, estimation, model selection, and evaluation steps. Tested across multiple sample sizes and extended to variables, the GUI demonstrated adaptability and robustness. Model performance showed that the KS-weighted mixture model provided stable fits for complex datasets, improving interpretability and reducing reliance on single-distribution assumptions.

Indexed as

ChlorophyllK-meansMarine environmentMixture modelModel accuracyModel evaluationProbability distributions

Identifiers

PMID40949830
PMCPMC12423415

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.