A Diagnostic Verification of the Precipitation Forecasts Produced by the Canadian Ensemble Prediction System
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract A comparatively long period of relative stability in the evolution of the Canadian Ensemble Forecast System was exploited to compile a large homogeneous set of precipitation forecasts. The probability of exceedance of a given threshold was computed as the fraction of ensemble member forecasts surpassing that threshold, and verified directly against observations from 36 stations across the country. These forecasts were stratified into warm and cool seasons and assessed against the observations through attributes diagrams, Brier skill scores, and areas under receiver operating characteristic curves. These measures were deemed sufficient to illuminate the salient features of a forecast system. Particular attention was paid to forecasts of 24-h accumulation, especially the exceedance of thresholds in the upper decile of station climates. The ability of the system to forecast extended dry periods was also explored. Warm season forecasts for the 90th percentile threshold were found to be competitive with, even superior to, those for the cool season when verifying across the sample lumping together all of the stations. The relative skill of the forecasts in the two seasons depends strongly on station location, however. Moreover, the skill of the warm season forecasts rapidly drops below cool season values as the thresholds become more extreme. The verification, particularly of the cool season, is sensitive to the calibration of the gauge reports, which is complicated by the inclusion of snow events in the observational record.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it