Study of cloud‐to‐ground lightning in Quebec: 1996–2005
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Using data from Hydro‐Quebec, a spatio‐temporal summary study of cloud‐to‐ground lightning in Quebec (45°‐53 °N; 81 °‐65° W) for the 1996–2005 period was performed on a sample of close to four million lightning strokes. The annual number of lightning strokes and the ratio of negative to positive lightning (76:24) do not differ significantly from one year to the next. Despite the fact that there was an average of 239 lightning days per year, the lightning strokes were concentrated over a period of a few days. Between 1996 and 2005, 50% of the total annual lightning was distributed over 11 days, 75% over 25 days, and 90% over 44 days. Overall, the peak in the average annual cycle occurs on 15 July. Between 1996 and 2002, the number of days with at least one positive lightning stroke remained higher than the number of days with at least one negative lightning stroke. This tendency reversed from 2003 until 2005. Most of the annual lightning occurred during June, July and August. The average minimum n...
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 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".