Verification of High-Resolution Medium-Range Precipitation Forecasts from Global Environmental Multiscale Model over China during 2009–2013
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Accurate and timely precipitation forecasts are a key factor for improving hydrological forecasts. Therefore, it is fundamental to evaluate the skill of Numerical Weather Prediction (NWP) for precipitation forecasting. In this study, the Global Environmental Multi-scale (GEM) model, which is widely used around Canada, was chosen as the high-resolution medium-term prediction model. Based on the forecast precipitation with the resolution of 0.24° and taking regional differences into consideration, the study explored the forecasting skill of GEM in nine drought sub-regions around China. Spatially, GEM performs better in East and South China than in the inland areas. Temporally, the model is able to produce more precise precipitation during flood periods (summer and autumn) compared with the non-flood season (winter and spring). The forecasting skill variability differs with regions, lead time and season. For different precipitation categories, GEM for trace rainfall and little rainfall performs much better than moderate rainfall and above. Overall, compared with other prediction systems, GEM is applicable for the 0–96 h forecast, especially for the East and South China in flood season, but improvement for the prediction of heavy and storm rainfall and for the inland areas should be focused on as well.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".