MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2026862757 · doi:10.5194/prp-1-135-2013

Characterizing change in the variability of surface air temperature records: a comparative approach

2013· article· en· W2026862757 on OpenAlexaffabout
Cristian Suteanu

Bibliographic record

VenuePattern recognition in physics · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicClimate variability and models
Canadian institutionsSaint Mary's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSurface air temperatureEnvironmental scienceClimatologyAtmospheric sciencesClimate changeGeologyOceanography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An accurate and comprehensive characterization of surface air temperature (SAT) variability is important for numerous purposes: studies on climate and climate change, the evaluation of climate model outputs, research on the impacts of changes in variability, etc.In this paper, SAT variability is considered from two different points of view: a measure of dispersion referring to the values in the time series, but ignoring their temporal sequence (the standard deviation); and a measure of persistence, for which the succession of the values in the time series is important (the exponent H established with Haar wavelet analysis).This paper uses daily minimum and maximum temperature records from Canadian stations in the Atlantic region and finds that: (i) SAT pattern variability can be assessed with the help of distinct methods applied together, in ways that might not be possible with any of the applied methods used separately; (ii) SAT pattern variability changes significantly over time; (iii) oscillations on scales from years to decades in both standard deviation S and the H exponent take place; (iv) the temporal change in SAT variability is reflected differently by the two applied methods: general statements concerning increases or decreases in variability should not be made without specifying the applied measure of variability.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0110.011
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.077
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.196 · 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

Citations2
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePattern recognition in physics→Same topicClimate variability and models→French-language works237,207→