MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2001634594 · doi:10.1175/2011jhm1250.1

Near-Surface and Land Surface Forecast System of the Vancouver 2010 Winter Olympic and Paralympic Games

2011· article· en· W2001634594 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Natacha B. Bernier, Stéphane Bélair, Bernard Bilodeau, Linying Tong

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Hydrometeorology · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicCryospheric studies and observations
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDownscalingEnvironmental scienceSnowElevation (ballistics)MeteorologyClimatologyLand coverSnow coverPrecipitationLand useGeographyGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract A high-resolution 2D near-surface and land surface model was developed to produce snow and temperature forecasts over the complex alpine region of the Vancouver 2010 Winter Olympic and Paralympic Games. The model is driven by downscaled operational outputs from the Meteorological Service of Canada’s regional and global forecast models. Downscaling is applied to correct forcings for elevation differences between the operational forecast models and the high-resolution surface model. The high-resolution near-surface and land surface model is then used to further refine the forecasts. The model was validated against temperature and snow depth observations. The largest improvements were found in regions where low-resolution (i.e., on the order of 10 km or more) operational models typically lack the spatial resolution to capture rapid elevation changes. The model was found to better reproduce the intermittent snow cover at low-lying stations and to reduce snow depth error by as much as 3 m at alpine stations.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.194
Threshold uncertainty score0.391

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.194
Teacher spread0.174 · 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

Citations45
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of HydrometeorologySame topicCryospheric studies and observationsFrench-language works237,207