MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Inter-Comparison Study of the ENSEMBLE Project

2008· article· en· W1997844072 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Kyung-Suk Suh, Moon Hee Han, Sung Hee Jung, Chang‐Woo Lee

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Nuclear Science and Technology · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicMeteorological Phenomena and Simulations
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHarmonizationEnsemble forecastingRange (aeronautics)Ensemble averageDispersion (optics)Environmental scienceEconometricsMeteorologyStatisticsOperations researchNuclear engineeringGeographyClimatologyMathematicsPhysicsEngineeringGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

During the days of the Chernobyl accident, the European national long-range dispersion forecasts would differ because of differences in national models, and differences in weather prediction methods. ENSEMBLE project was launched for a reconciliation and harmonization of the disparate long-range dispersion forecasts. Responsible European emergency organizations in addition to Canadian, Japanese, Korean and US agencies have participated in ENSEMBLE. KAERI joined the inter-comparison study for the exercise on the 901–001 scenario in ENSEMBLE. KAERI was assigned KR1 as a national code and 53 as a model number. The model of KAERI was compared with the other models of the participants in ENSEMBLE. The comparative results are presented with the scatter plots and statistical methods in this paper.

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)0.024
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.050
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.128

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0240.050
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.223 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations2
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Nuclear Science and TechnologySame topicMeteorological Phenomena and SimulationsFrench-language works237,207