Seasonal prediction of winter extreme precipitation over Canada by support vector regression
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. For forecasting the maximum 5-day accumulated precipitation over the winter season at lead times of 3, 6, 9 and 12 months over Canada from 1950 to 2007, two nonlinear and two linear regression models were used, where the models were support vector regression (SVR) (nonlinear and linear versions), nonlinear Bayesian neural network (BNN) and multiple linear regression (MLR). The 118 stations were grouped into six geographic regions by K-means clustering. For each region, the leading principal components of the winter maximum 5-d accumulated precipitation anomalies were the predictands. Potential predictors included quasi-global sea surface temperature anomalies and 500 hPa geopotential height anomalies over the Northern Hemisphere, as well as six climate indices (the Niño-3.4 region sea surface temperature, the North Atlantic Oscillation, the Pacific-North American teleconnection, the Pacific Decadal Oscillation, the Scandinavia pattern, and the East Atlantic pattern). The results showed that in general the two robust SVR models tended to have better forecast skills than the two non-robust models (MLR and BNN), and the nonlinear SVR model tended to forecast slightly better than the linear SVR model. Among the six regions, the Prairies region displayed the highest forecast skills, and the Arctic region the second highest. The strongest nonlinearity was manifested over the Prairies and the weakest nonlinearity over the Arctic.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".