MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W135674129

Cloud-to-ground lightning in Yukon, Canada during a season of extreme wildfire activity

2010· article· en· W135674129 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Bohdan Kochtubajda, William R. Burrows, Dan McLennan, Don Green

Bibliographic record

VenueEGU General Assembly Conference Abstracts · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicLightning and Electromagnetic Phenomena
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLightning (connector)ThunderstormRidgePrecipitationMeteorologyEnvironmental scienceGeographyClimatologyPhysical geographyGeologyCartography
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cloud-to-ground (CG) lightning from thunderstorms initiating forest fires is a typical summer hazard in the rugged terrain of the Yukon Territory of northern Canada. The lightning season usually starts in May, peaks during July and is usually over in September. This region typically experiences 141 wildfires annually which burn over 160,000 hectares between June and August. An annual average of over 20 thousand CG flashes account for about 54% of these ignitions. During the summer of 2004, a persistent upper level ridge dominated throughout the Yukon. Maximum temperatures were above normal for much of the season and precipitation amounts were about 60% of normal. The number of CG flashes, lightning-initiated forest fires and extent of the area burned surpassed historic records. Specifically, over 40 thousand CG flashes accounted for 88% of the 282 wildfires consuming over 1.7 million hectares of the territory. (Green, 2004; WFRP, 2005). The 2004 fire season in Alaska burned about 2.7 million hectares.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.112

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.205 · 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
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEGU General Assembly Conference AbstractsSame topicLightning and Electromagnetic PhenomenaFrench-language works237,207