MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2086210992 · doi:10.1007/s00382-013-1778-9

Reanalysis-driven climate simulation over CORDEX North America domain using the Canadian Regional Climate Model, version 5: model performance evaluation

2013· article· en· W2086210992 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Andrey Martynov, René Laprise, Laxmi Sushama, Katja Winger, Leo Šeparović, B. Dugas

Bibliographic record

VenueClimate Dynamics · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicClimate variability and models
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMitacsCanada Research ChairsCanadian Foundation for Climate and Atmospheric SciencesCompute CanadaMinistère du Développement Économique, de l’Innovation et de l’Exportation
KeywordsDownscalingClimatologyPrecipitationClimate modelEnvironmental scienceMonsoonClimate changeGeneral Circulation ModelGeographyGeologyMeteorologyOceanography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The performance of reanalysis-driven Canadian Regional Climate Model, version 5 (CRCM5) in reproducing the present climate over the North American COordinated Regional climate Downscaling EXperiment domain for the 1989–2008 period has been assessed in comparison with several observation-based datasets. The model reproduces satisfactorily the near-surface temperature and precipitation characteristics over most part of North America. Coastal and mountainous zones remain problematic: a cold bias (2–6 °C) prevails over Rocky Mountains in summertime and all year-round over Mexico; winter precipitation in mountainous coastal regions is overestimated. The precipitation patterns related to the North American Monsoon are well reproduced, except on its northern limit. The spatial and temporal structure of the Great Plains Low-Level Jet is well reproduced by the model; however, the night-time precipitation maximum in the jet area is underestimated. The performance of CRCM5 was assessed against earlier CRCM versions and other RCMs. CRCM5 is shown to have been substantially improved compared to CRCM3 and CRCM4 in terms of seasonal mean statistics, and to be comparable to other modern RCMs.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.038
Threshold uncertainty score0.076

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.000
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.237 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations213
Published2013
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClimate DynamicsSame topicClimate variability and modelsFrench-language works237,207