MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2791296865 · doi:10.1002/joc.5454

Spatiotemporal variations of aridity in Iran using high‐resolution gridded data

2018· article· en· W2791296865 on OpenAlexaff
Alireza Araghi, Christopher J. Martinez, Jan Adamowski, Jørgen E. Olesen

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Climatology · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicClimate variability and models
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersNational Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
KeywordsClimatologyEnvironmental scienceAridMeteorologyGeologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Aridity is a permanent feature of climate based on long‐term climatic conditions over a region. Climatic indices are reliable tools to explore climate type, and climatologists have proposed various indices to classify climate and investigate the aridity or humidity in any region. In this study, we examined spatiotemporal variations of aridity in Iran during the last six decades from 1954 to 2013, using the de Martonne aridity index ( I DM ), which is calculated based on precipitation and temperature. Data used in this study were extracted from the Global Precipitation Climatology Centre and the University of Delaware gridded data sets, respectively. Both data sets have global high‐resolution (0.5° × 0.5°) coverage, and temporally span more than a century of data (from 1901). According to the data obtained from these data sets, more than 80% of Iran has an arid and semi‐arid climate (annually), although the spatial pattern of I DM varies throughout the year. Using the Mann–Kendall test showed a negative significant trend in I DM in 20% of Iran's total area in spring, and less than 7% in the other seasons of the year. Overall, it can be concluded that there were no significant trends in aridity for most parts of Iran during the last six decades.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.378
Threshold uncertainty score0.965

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.101
GPT teacher head0.350
Teacher spread0.249 · 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

Citations68
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of ClimatologySame topicClimate variability and modelsFrench-language works237,207