MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2007906189 · doi:10.1175/jcli3505.1

Adverse-Weather Trends in the Canadian Arctic

2005· article· en· W2007906189 on OpenAlexafffundabout
John Hanesiak, Xiaolan L. Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Climate · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicClimate change and permafrost
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsEnvironmental scienceSnowClimatologyPrecipitationArcticWinter stormClimate changeAdverse weatherFreezing rainAir temperatureAtmospheric sciencesMeteorologyGeographyGeologyOceanography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This study provides an assessment of changes in the occurrence frequency of four types of adverse-weather (freezing precipitation, blowing snow, fog, and low ceilings) and no-weather (i.e., no precipitation or visibility obscuration) events as observed at 15 Canadian Arctic stations of good hourly weather observations for 1953–2004. The frequency time series were subjected to a homogenization procedure prior to a logistic regression–based trend analysis. The results show that the frequency of freezing precipitation has increased almost everywhere across the Canadian Arctic since 1953. Rising air temperature in the region has probably resulted in more times that the temperature is suitable for freezing precipitation. On the contrary, the frequency of blowing snow occurrence has decreased significantly in the Canadian Arctic. The decline is most significant in spring. Changes in fog and low ceiling (LC) occurrences have similar patterns and are most (least) significant in summer (autumn). Decreases were identified for both types of events in the eastern region in all seasons. In the southwest, however, the fog frequency has increased significantly in all seasons, while the LC frequency has decreased significantly in spring and summer. The regional mean rate of change in the frequency of the four types of adverse weather was estimated to be 7%–13% per decade. The frequency of no-weather events has also decreased significantly at most of the 15 sites. The decrease is most significant and extensive in autumn. Comparison with the adverse-weather trends above indicates that the decline in no-weather occurrence (i.e., increase in weather occurrence) is not the result of an increase in blowing snow or fog occurrence; it is largely the result of the increasing frequency of freezing precipitation and, most likely, other types of precipitation as well. This is consistent with the reported increases in precipitation amount and more frequent cyclone activity in the lower Canadian Arctic.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.898
Threshold uncertainty score0.988

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)0.0130.000

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.226 · 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.

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

Citations69
Published2005
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of ClimateSame topicClimate change and permafrostFrench-language works237,207