MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2036818561 · doi:10.1080/07055900.2000.9649661

Atmospheric teleconnection patterns and severity of winters in the Laurentian Great Lakes basin

2000· article· en· W2036818561 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueATMOSPHERE-OCEAN · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicClimate variability and models
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTeleconnectionClimatologyAtmospheric circulationNorthern HemispherePolar vortexBorealStructural basinEl Niño Southern OscillationEnvironmental sciencePacific decadal oscillationGeographyGeologyTroposphere

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We analyzed the relationship between an index of Great Lakes winter severity (winters 1950–1998) and atmospheric circulation characteristics. Classification and Regression Tree analysis methods allowed us to develop a simple characterization of warm, normal and cold winters in terms of teleconnection indices and their combinations. Results are presented in the form of decision trees. The single most important classifier for warm winters was the Polar/Eurasian index (POL). A majority of warm winters (12 out of 15) occurred when this index was substantially positive (POL > 0.23). There were no cold winters when this condition was in place. Warm winters are associated with a positive phase of the Western Pacific pattern and El Niño events in the equatorial Pacific. The association between cold winters and La Niña events was much weaker. Thus, the effect of the El Niño/Southern Oscillation (ENSO) on severity of winters in the Great Lakes basin is not symmetric. The structure of the relationship between the index of winter severity and teleconnection indices is more complex for cold winters than for warm winters. It takes two or more indices to successfully classify cold winters. In general, warm winters are characterized by a predominantly zonal type of atmospheric circulation over the Northern Hemisphere (type W1). Within this type of circulation it is possible to distinguish two sub‐types, W2 and W3. Sub‐type W2 is characterized by a high‐pressure cell over North America, which is accompanied by enhanced cyclonic activity over the eastern North Pacific. Due to a broad southerly “anomalous” flow, surface air temperatures (SATs) are above normal almost everywhere over the continent. During the W3 sub‐type, the polar jet stream over North America, instead of forming a typical ridge‐trough pattern, is almost entirely zonal, thus effectively blocking an advection of cold Arctic air to the south. Cold winters tend to occur when the atmospheric circulation is more meridional (type C1). As with warm winters, there are two sub‐types of circulation, C2 and C3. In the case of C2, the jet stream loops southward over the western part of North America, but its northern excursion over the eastern part is suppressed. In this situation, the probability of a cold winter is higher for Lake Superior than for the lower Great Lakes. Sub‐type C3 is characterized by an amplification of the climatological ridge over the Rockies and the trough over the East Coast. The strongest negative SAT anomalies are located south of the Great Lakes basin, so that the probability of a cold winter is higher for the lower Great Lakes than for Lake Superior.

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.

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)0.000
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 score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.989

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0120.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.205
Teacher spread0.197 · 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