MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2595296361 · doi:10.1002/2017gl072920

The complex behavior of El Niño winter 2015–2016

2017· article· en· W2595296361 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Froila M. Palmeiro, Maddalen Iza, David Barriopedro, Natalia Calvo, Ricardo García‐Herrera

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysical Research Letters · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicClimate variability and models
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMinisterio de Economía y CompetitividadFPInnovationsMet Office
KeywordsTeleconnectionStratospherePolar vortexClimatologyPrecipitationPolarEnvironmental scienceOceanographyAtmospheric sciencesGeologyEl Niño Southern OscillationGeographyMeteorologyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This paper examines the outstanding characteristics of the strong 2015–2016 El Niño (EN) winter and its impact over the European region through the stratosphere. Despite being classified as a strong eastern Pacific (EP) EN event, our analysis reveals an anomalous behavior, with some signatures that are more typical of central Pacific (CP) EN events instead. They include (i) a record‐breaking value of the CP index, (ii) a stronger polar vortex in early and midwinter, due to reduced upward wave activity and a weakened Aleutian low, and (iii) the occurrence of one of the earliest stratospheric final warmings (SFWs) on record, which are more prone to occur during CP‐EN. Following the SFW, a stratospheric influence on the Euro‐Atlantic sector is reported in spring, with persistent Greenland blocking resulting in extreme precipitation over some southern European regions. Results highlight the importance of considering early SFWs as mediators of El Niño teleconnections.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.092
GPT teacher head0.386
Teacher spread0.294 · 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
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeophysical Research LettersSame topicClimate variability and modelsFrench-language works237,207