MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2094448605 · doi:10.1029/2005gl023451

Precipitation forecast skill of numerical weather prediction models and radar nowcasts

2005· article· en· W2094448605 on OpenAlex
Charles A. Lin, Slavko Vasić, Alamelu Kilambi, Barry Turner, Isztar Zawadzki

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysical Research Letters · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicMeteorological Phenomena and Simulations
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersWorkforce Development for Teachers and Scientists
KeywordsNowcastingQuantitative precipitation forecastRadarPrecipitationAdvectionMeteorologyNumerical weather predictionForecast skillClimatologyEnvironmental scienceComputer scienceGeologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Short term precipitation forecasts based on Lagrangian advection of radar echoes are robust and have more skill than numerical weather prediction models over time scales of several hours. This is because the models do not generally capture well the initial precipitation distribution. We will refer to the advection‐based methods as radar nowcasts. Over longer time scales, we expect the models to perform better than nowcast methods as they resolve dynamically the large scale flow. We verify this conceptual picture of the relative accuracy of radar nowcasts and model forecasts using conventional skill scores. We identify the cross‐over point in time where model forecasts start to have more skill than nowcast methods. This occurs at about 6 hours after the forecast is initiated.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.544
Threshold uncertainty score0.425

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.238 · 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