MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2149263577 · doi:10.1002/qj.254

Analysis of Indian monsoon daily rainfall on subseasonal to multidecadal time‐scales using a hidden Markov model

2008· article· en· W2149263577 on OpenAlexaff
Arthur M. Greene, Andrew W. Robertson, Sergey Kirshner

Bibliographic record

VenueQuarterly Journal of the Royal Meteorological Society · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicClimate variability and models
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersUniversity of California, IrvineGoddard Space Flight CenterU.S. Department of Energy
KeywordsClimatologyMonsoonHomogeneousMadden–Julian oscillationEnvironmental scienceOscillation (cell signaling)ConvectionGeographyMeteorologyGeologyMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract A 70‐year record of daily monsoon‐season rainfall at a network of 13 stations in central western India is analyzed using a 4‐state homogeneous hidden Markov model. The diagnosed states are seen to play distinct roles in the seasonal march of the monsoon, can be associated with ‘active’ and ‘break’ monsoon phases and capture the northward propagation of convective disturbances associated with the intraseasonal oscillation. Interannual variations in station rainfall are found to be associated with the alternation, from year to year, in the frequency of occurrence of wet and dry states; this mode of variability is well correlated with both all‐India monsoon rainfall and an index characterizing the strength of the El Niño Southern Oscillation. Analysis of low‐passed time series suggests that variations in state frequency are responsible for the modulation of monsoon rainfall on multidecadal time‐scales as well. Copyright © 2008 Royal Meteorological Society

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.036
Threshold uncertainty score0.072

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.224 · 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

Citations37
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueQuarterly Journal of the Royal Meteorological SocietySame topicClimate variability and modelsFrench-language works237,207