MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2754563037 · doi:10.1175/jamc-d-16-0394.1

Intraseasonal Variations of Winter Wind Chill Temperatures across Canada and the United States

2017· article· en· W2754563037 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Macy E. Howarth, Neil F. Laird

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Meteorology and Climatology · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicClimate variability and models
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersDirectorate for Geosciences
KeywordsClimatologyEnvironmental scienceBayWind speedWinter seasonExtreme ColdAtmospheric sciencesGeographyMeteorologyGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Wind chill temperature (WCT) is a measure of the human sensation of cold and also is a parameter used to represent the severity of winter weather. This study provides a unique investigation to quantify the spatial patterns of monthly mean, extreme, and severe WCTs across Canada and the United States. WCT was examined across 45 winters (December–February) spanning 1969/70–2013/14 using 156 surface locations reporting hourly meteorological conditions. Intraseasonal analyses of WCT showed that January had 1) the coldest mean WCTs, 2) the most extreme WCTs as statistically represented by the coldest 1% of the monthly WCT frequency distribution at each surface location, and 3) the greatest frequency of severe WCT hours that were ≤ −32°C. The most extreme WCTs were most often located in the Hudson Bay region of Canada, and north-central and northeastern North America experienced the largest monthly changes in WCT during the winter season. Results suggest that intraseasonal changes of air temperature are the primary influence on variations of WCT and that changes of wind speed are a secondary factor.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.040

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.232 · 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 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

Citations7
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Applied Meteorology and ClimatologySame topicClimate variability and modelsFrench-language works237,207