MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1616498667 · doi:10.1002/2015wr017144

Suppressed convective rainfall by agricultural expansion in southeastern <scp>B</scp>urkina <scp>F</scp>aso

2015· article· en· W1616498667 on OpenAlexaff
Théophile Mande, Natalie Ceperley, Gabriel G. Katul, S. W. Tyler, Hamma Yacouba, M. B. Parlange

Bibliographic record

VenueWater Resources Research · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicPlant Water Relations and Carbon Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersU.S. Department of Energy
KeywordsAgricultureEnvironmental scienceHydrology (agriculture)Agricultural landGeographyAgroforestryGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract With the “green economy” being promoted as a path to sustainable development and food security within the African continent, the influx of agricultural land is proliferating at a rapid pace often replacing natural savannah forests. Where agriculture is primarily rainfed, the possible adverse impacts of agricultural land influx on rainfall occurrences in water‐limited areas such as West Africa warrant attention. Using field observations complemented by model calculations in southeastern Burkina Faso, the main causes of a 10–30% suppressed daytime rainfall recorded over agricultural fields when referenced to natural savannah forests are examined. Measurements and model runs reveal that the crossing of the mixed layer height and lifting condensation levels, a necessary condition for cloud formation and subsequent rainfall occurrence, was 30% more frequent above the natural savannah forest. This increase in crossing statistics was primarily explained by increases in measured sensible heat flux above the savannah forest rather than differences in lifting condensation heights.

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 score0.031
Threshold uncertainty score0.062

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.231 · 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

Citations11
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWater Resources ResearchSame topicPlant Water Relations and Carbon DynamicsFrench-language works237,207