MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2130031207 · doi:10.1002/asl2.574

Testing a reanalysis‐based infilling method for areas with sparse discontinuous air temperature data in northeastern Canada

2015· article· en· W2130031207 on OpenAlex

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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueAtmospheric Science Letters · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicClimate variability and models
Canadian institutionsQueen's UniversityUniversity of Ottawa
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaAssociation of Canadian Universities for Northern Studies
KeywordsClimatologyInterimEnvironmental scienceBaseline (sea)DownscalingMeteorologyGeographyGeologyPrecipitationOceanography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This study tests various applications of a new technique for infilling sparse monthly climate data which combines temperature anomalies from gridded observational and reanalysis data sets with baseline climatologies from short‐instrumental records. Out‐of‐sample comparisons between infilled and observed climate data for 53 stations in northeastern Canada suggests that mean absolute errors using the proposed method are ±1 and ±0.5 °C on monthly and annual timescales, respectively. Evaluation of several gridded data sets used to guide infilling suggests that ERA‐Interim ( ERAI ) and modern‐era retrospective reanalysis ( MERRA ) reanalyses are the most suitable for this purpose in the Labrador‐Ungava region.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.354
Threshold uncertainty score0.605

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.223 · 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