Atmospheric circulation comparisons between the 2001 and 2002 and the 1961 and 1988 Canadian prairie droughts
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The 2001 and 2002 Canadian Prairie droughts were unusual climatological events in terms of their extreme precipitation anomalies and extraordinary persistence. Over the west‐central Prairie Provinces, well below normal precipitation was recorded for a remarkable eight consecutive seasons from autumn 2000 to summer 2002. Analysis of the mid‐tropospheric circulation during these droughts indicates that the patterns were markedly different from those associated with the severe, multi‐season Prairie droughts of 1961 and 1988. In particular, the circulation during 2001 and 2002 lacked the distinct meridional flow over the North Pacific and North America that has been associated with previous dry periods over western Canada. Moreover, the evolution and persistence of the 2001–2002 droughts have no clear relationships with large‐scale teleconnection patterns that have influenced past climate extremes over western regions of the country. Results suggest that the recent droughts may be related to a northward extension of persistent drought producing circulation anomalies that influenced the continental United States. These differences in circulation indicate that further research is required to gain a better understanding and aid in the prediction of extended dry periods over North America.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".