MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1974609641 · doi:10.1080/07060660409507144

Forecasting plant disease in a changing climate: a question of scale

2004· article· en· W1974609641 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Robert C. Seem

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Plant Pathology · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicClimate variability and models
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDownscalingClimatologyMesoscale meteorologyScale (ratio)Context (archaeology)Climate changeEnvironmental scienceGeneral Circulation ModelMeteorologyModel output statisticsClimate modelNumerical weather predictionGeographyPrecipitationGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The subtle changes in climate attributed to climate change can affect plant-disease development. These changes are not easily determined, and consequently, the ability to forecast how disease changes under altered growth conditions is not simple. One method is the use of forecast climate change derived from global-change models that are analogous to general-circulation models used for weather forecasts. However, these models predict conditions on such a gross scale that they are unacceptable for most disease forecasting. Downscaling provides a method whereby weather and climate conditions estimated at a very large scale can be transferred to a fine resolution (∼200-m grid points). This process is explained, in particular, in the context of disease forecasting. An example is presented of how estimates of extreme low temperature at a local scale have been derived from a mesoscale (mid-range) weather forecast model, which in turn was derived from a general-circulation model. Similarly, the derivation of forecasts at local scale from mesoscale weather forecast models have been demonstrated for grapevine downy mildew. Important considerations of scale definition and information transfer across different scales are discussed

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.102
Threshold uncertainty score0.945

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.193 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations31
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Plant PathologySame topicClimate variability and modelsFrench-language works237,207