MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2116519171 · doi:10.1175/2009waf2222230.1

Evaluation of Alberta Hail Growth Model Using Severe Hail Proximity Soundings from the United States

2009· article· en· W2116519171 on OpenAlexaffabout
Ryan E. Jewell, Julian Brimelow

Bibliographic record

VenueWeather and Forecasting · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicMeteorological Phenomena and Simulations
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDepth soundingMeteorologyEnvironmental scienceCalibrationEnsemble forecastingClimatologyGeographyStatisticsGeologyMathematicsCartography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract A one-dimensional, coupled hail and cloud model (HAILCAST) is tested to assess its ability to predict hail size. The model employs an ensemble approach when forecasting maximum hail size, uses a sounding as input, and can be run in seconds on an operational workstation. The model was originally developed in South Africa and then improved upon in Canada, using high quality hail verification data for calibration. In this study, the model was run on a spatially and seasonally diverse set of 914 modified severe hail proximity soundings collected within the contiguous United States between 1989 and 2004. Model output was then compared to the maximum observed hail size for each proximity sounding. Basic verification statistics are presented, showing that the HAILCAST model exhibits considerable skill that can be of use to the operational severe weather forecaster.

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)0.001
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 score0.401
Threshold uncertainty score0.807

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.104
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.157 · 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

Citations77
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWeather and ForecastingSame topicMeteorological Phenomena and SimulationsFrench-language works237,207