MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2306575002 · doi:10.1002/hyp.10855

The June 2013 Alberta catastrophic flooding event – part 2: fine‐scale precipitation and associated features

2016· article· en· W2306575002 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Bohdan Kochtubajda, Ronald E. Stewart, Sudesh Boodoo, Julie M. Thériault, Yanping Li, A. Liu, Curtis Mooney, Ron Goodson, Kit K. Szeto

Bibliographic record

VenueHydrological Processes · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicMeteorological Phenomena and Simulations
Canadian institutionsGlobal Institute for Water SecurityUniversity of SaskatchewanUniversité du Québec à MontréalUniversity of ManitobaEnvironment and Climate Change Canada
FundersEnvironment and Climate Change CanadaNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaUniversité du Québec à Montréal
KeywordsPrecipitationFlooding (psychology)Low-pressure areaLightning (connector)Flood mythClimatologyEnvironmental scienceThunderstormLightning detectionOrographyConvectionMeteorologyAtmospheric sciencesGeologyAtmospheric pressureGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Data obtained from a variety of sources including the Canadian Lightning Detection Network, weather radars, weather stations and operational numerical weather model analyses were used to address the evolution of precipitation during the June 2013 southern Alberta flood. The event was linked to a mid‐level closed low pressure system to the west of the region and a surface low pressure region initially to its south. This configuration brought warm, moist unstable air into the region that led to dramatic, organized convection with an abundance of lightning and some hail. Such conditions occurred in the southern parts of the region whereas the northern parts were devoid of lightning. Initially, precipitation rates were high (extreme 15‐min rainfall rates up to 102 mm h −1 were measured) but decreased to lower values as the precipitation shifted to long‐lived stratiform conditions. Both the convective and stratiform precipitation components were affected by the topography. Similar flooding events, such as June 2002, have occurred over this region although the 2002 event was colder and precipitation was not associated with substantial convection over southwest Alberta. Copyright © 2016 Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada. Hydrological Processes. © John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.098
Threshold uncertainty score0.936

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.204 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations12
Published2016
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHydrological ProcessesSame topicMeteorological Phenomena and SimulationsFrench-language works237,207