Analysis of consecutive droughts on the Canadian Prairies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
CR Climate Research Contact the journal Facebook Twitter RSS Mailing List Subscribe to our mailing list via Mailchimp HomeLatest VolumeAbout the JournalEditorsSpecials CR 30:175-187 (2006) - doi:10.3354/cr030175 Analysis of consecutive droughts on the Canadian Prairies A. C. Chipanshi*, K. M. Findlater, T. Hadwen, E. G. O'Brien Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, National Agroclimate Information Service, Regina, Saskatchewan, S4P 4L2, Canada *Email: chipanshia@agr.gc.ca ABSTRACT: Canadian Prairie precipitation totals were classified using fixed thresholds corresponding to the 10th percentile and median for the growing season (April to August) and agricultural year (September to August), in order to study the incidence of consecutive drought. These time frames are significant to water supply and agricultural activities. Consecutive drought events were classified as either back to back years with precipitation below the 10th percentile, or a year with precipitation below the 10th percentile followed by one or more years with less than median precipitation. The Palliser Triangle (an area in the southern Prairies) most consistently recorded consecutive drought events. While generally receiving higher precipitation totals, stations in the north were not immune to such events. Using the Palmer Drought Index, severe droughts were detected in the 1910s, 1930s and 1960s, corresponding to notably dry periods across the Canadian Prairies as a whole. KEY WORDS: Canadian Prairies · Consecutive droughts · Agricultural year · Growing season · Dry spells Full text in pdf format NextExport citation RSS - Facebook - Tweet - linkedIn Cited by Published in CR Vol. 30, No. 3. Online publication date: April 26, 2006 Print ISSN: 0936-577X; Online ISSN: 1616-1572 Copyright © 2006 Inter-Research.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".