MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2072624866 · doi:10.1029/2008jd010708

Probability distributions of land surface wind speeds over North America

2010· article· en· W2072624866 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Yanping He, Adam H. Monahan, Colin Jones, Aiguo Dai, S. Biner, D. Caya, Katja Winger

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Geophysical Research Atmospheres · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicClimate variability and models
Canadian institutionsOuranosUniversité du Québec à MontréalUniversity of Victoria
FundersMitacs
KeywordsWeibull distributionSkewnessEnvironmental scienceWind speedStandard deviationProbability density functionClimatologyAtmospheric sciencesMeteorologyDaytimeRange (aeronautics)Climate modelClimate changeGeologyStatisticsMathematicsGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Knowledge of the probability distributions of surface wind speeds (SWS) is essential for surface flux estimation, wind power estimation, and wind risk assessments. The two‐parameter Weibull distribution is the most widely used empirical distribution for SWS. This study considers the probability density function (PDF) of 3‐hourly observations from 720 weather stations over North America for the period 1979–1999. The PDF of SWS is classified by season, time of day, and land surface type. The Weibull PDF is characterized by a particular relationship between the mean, standard deviation, and skewness. While the moments of the observed daytime SWS PDF are found to collapse around this Weibull relationship, the observed nighttime PDF has a broader range of values and is significantly more skewed than the Weibull PDF over rough surfaces. An idealized model shows that SWS skewness has a much greater rate of change with both the mean and standard deviation of surface buoyancy flux under conditions of stable stratification than that of unstable stratification. This result suggests that surface buoyancy flux plays an important role in generating diurnal variation of SWS PDF. Two global reanalyses products (ERA‐40 and NCEP‐NCAR) and three regional climate models (RCMs) (Rossby Centre Atmospheric Model version 3 (RCA3), limited area version of Global Environmental Multiscale Model (GEM‐LAM), and Canadian Regional Climate Model, version 4 (CRCM4)) all have a less skewed nighttime PDF and a more narrow range of the normal wind speed during day and night. Among them, two of the RCMs capture the observed SWS differences across different land cover types, and only one of the RCMs produces the observed seasonal peak of SWS PDF.

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)0.001
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 score0.087
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.314
Teacher spread0.277 · 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

Citations93
Published2010
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Geophysical Research AtmospheresSame topicClimate variability and modelsFrench-language works237,207