Multiscale Aspects of the Storm Producing the June 2013 Flooding in Uttarakhand, India
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Conditions producing disastrous flooding in Uttarakhand, India, in June 2013 differed from conditions that produced other notorious floods in the Himalayan region in recent years. During the week preceding the Uttarakhand flood, deep convection moistened the mountainsides, making them vulnerable to flooding. However, the precipitation producing the flood was not associated with a deep convective event. Rather, an eastward-propagating upper-level trough in the westerlies extended abnormally far southward, with the jet reaching the Himalayas. The south end of the trough merged with a monsoon low moving westward across India. The merged system produced persistent moist low-level flow oriented normal to the Himalayas that advected large amounts of water vapor into the Uttarakhand region. The flow was moist neutral when it passed over the Himalayan barrier, and orographic lifting produced heavy continuous rain over the region for 2–3 days. The precipitation was largely stratiform in nature although embedded convection of moderate depth occurred along the foothills, where some mild instability was being released. The Uttarakhand flood had characteristics in common with major 2013 floods in the Rocky Mountains in Colorado and Alberta, Canada.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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".