MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2794854082 · doi:10.1002/joc.5515

Drought characteristics over China during 1980–2015

2018· article· en· W2794854082 on OpenAlexaff
Dongguo Shao, Shu Chen, Xuezhi Tan, Wenquan Gu

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Climatology · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrology and Drought Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaChina Scholarship CouncilNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
KeywordsClimatologyPlateau (mathematics)ChinaEnvironmental scienceDuration (music)GeographyPhysical geographyGeologyMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The self‐calibrating Palmer drought severity index (scPDSI) was computed based on the four atmospheric reanalysis data sets combined with observational data over China during 1980–2015. The discrepancies of scPDSI among the four reanalysis data sets show the necessity of integrating multiple data sets. Drought characteristics, such as drought area, severity, duration, and frequency were examined based on multi‐data set mean scPDSI. The results reveal that significant drying trends are found in Qinghai‐Tibet Plateau, southwest, southeast and entire China. Drought area (drought severity) has increased (decreased) by about 1.16% (0.015%) per decade over entire China. Trends in drought duration, temporally averaged severity and frequency also indicate that droughts become more serious in each region during the past 36 years. The identification of drought events in each month by the clustering algorithm shows that droughts over China are more and more frequent. In addition, 65 separate drought events with the duration longer than 3 months were identified under the area threshold of 150,000 km2. Through severity‐area‐duration analysis, the 2005–2015 drought is found to be the prominent event.

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)0.000
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 score0.050
Threshold uncertainty score0.100

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.267 · 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

Citations87
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of ClimatologySame topicHydrology and Drought AnalysisFrench-language works237,207