MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2148331154 · doi:10.1002/joc.3682

Tibetan Plateau precipitation as depicted by gauge observations, reanalyses and satellite retrievals

2013· article· en· W2148331154 on OpenAlexaff
Kai Pong Tong, Fengge Su, Daqing Yang, Leilei Zhang, Zhenchun Hao

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Climatology · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicClimate variability and models
Canadian institutionsEnvironment and Climate Change Canada
FundersNational Key Research and Development Program of ChinaChinese Academy of SciencesChina Meteorological AdministrationNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaUniversity of Washington
KeywordsPrecipitationClimatologyPlateau (mathematics)Environmental scienceRain gaugeSatelliteQuantitative precipitation estimationMonsoonAtmospheric sciencesMeteorologyGeographyGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT The European Centre for Medium‐range Weather Forecasts ( ECMWF ) reanalysis ERA ‐40, ERA ‐Interim, University of Washington ( UW ) data, APHRODITE's Water Resources ( APHRODITE ), and Tropical Rainfall Measuring Mission (TRMM) Multisatellite Precipitation Analysis ( TMPA ) precipitation estimates are compared with each other and with the corrected gauge observations over the Tibetan Plateau ( TP ) at both basin and plateau scales. The ERA ‐40 generally can capture the broad spatial and temporal distributions in the gauge‐based precipitation estimates over the TP . However, the ERA ‐40 shows little agreement with the gauge‐based precipitation in annual variations for the years before 1979. The anticipated improvements in the ERA ‐Interim precipitation relative to ERA ‐40 have not been realized in this study. It greatly overestimates the Corrected‐China Meteorological Administration ( CMA ) (by 74–290%) and other datasets, although the ERA ‐Interim has a better correspondence than ERA ‐40 with the Corrected‐ CMA data at both annual and monthly scales among the selected basins. All the products can detect the large‐scale precipitation regime, including the monsoon‐dominated precipitation in summer and the westerly‐wind‐induced precipitation in winter. The Corrected‐ CMA and APHRODITE estimates generally show decreasing trends in summer and increasing trends in spring and winter precipitation during 1961–2007 at both basin and plateau scales. However, the Corrected‐ CMA shows larger values in trends and more cases with significance than the APHRODITE , suggesting the effects of the undercatch corrections on the precipitation trends. The use of precipitation derived from current reanalysis projects is less preferable for hydrology analysis than the TP observational data at basin scales. However, using gauge‐based precipitation datasets as hydrologic model forcings should be careful in the river basins where gauge station network is spare, such as in the Yarlung zangbo river basin. Satellite products still hold a great potential for providing high‐resolution precipitation information in remote regions such as the western TP , although more evaluations are needed on the feasibility of satellite precipitation products on the TP where the topography is complex and rainfall rate is highly variable.

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.067
Threshold uncertainty score0.133

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.262 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations248
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of ClimatologySame topicClimate variability and modelsFrench-language works237,207