Deterministic and ensemble storm surge prediction for Atlantic Canada with lead times of hours to ten days
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
Regional deterministic and ensemble surge prediction systems (RDSPS and RESPS respectively) are used to forecast sea levels off the east of Canada and northeast US. The surge models for the RDSPS and RESPS have grid spacings of 1/30° and 1/12° respectively. The models are driven by surface air pressure and 10 m winds generated by operational global deterministic and ensemble prediction systems that are run operationally by the Canadian Meteorological Centre. Surge forecasts are evaluated for the period 1 March, 2013 to 31 March 2014. Based on traditional statistics (e.g., standard deviation of the difference between observations and predictions) both systems are shown to have skill in forecasting surges six days into the future. It is shown however that skill exists beyond six days if allowance is made for errors in the timing of large surges. The usefulness of the RESPS is demonstrated for two positive surges (important for coastal flooding and erosion) and a negative surge (important for safe navigation in shallow water). It is shown that the RESPS can identify events not forecast by the RDSPS, and can also add useful additional information on the timing of the surge, an important consideration in tidally dominated waters. Several new types of display are used to illustrate the sort of information that can be generated by the RESPS to support the issuers of warnings of unusually high and low total water levels.
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