MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2802990981 · doi:10.1016/j.envsoft.2018.03.021

Downscaling of climate model output for Alaskan stakeholders

2018· article· en· W2802990981 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Uma S. Bhatt, Jeremy S. Littell, Matthew Leonawicz, M. Lindgren, Thomas A. Kurkowski, Peter A. Bieniek, Richard Thoman, Stephen T. Gray, T. Scott Rupp

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Modelling & Software · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicClimate variability and models
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersClimate Program OfficeAlaska Climate Adaptation Science Center, University of Alaska FairbanksNational Oceanic and Atmospheric AdministrationU.S. Geological SurveyU.S. Department of Energy
KeywordsDownscalingForcing (mathematics)Computer scienceVisualizationClimate modelNorthern HemisphereClimatologyEnvironmental scienceRange (aeronautics)SoftwareClimate changePrecipitationSelection (genetic algorithm)MeteorologyEnvironmental resource managementData miningGeographyMachine learningGeologyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The paper summarizes an end-to-end activity connecting the global climate modeling enterprise with users of climate information in Alaska. The effort included retrieval of the requisite observational datasets and model output, a model evaluation and selection procedure, the actual downscaling by the delta method with its inherent bias-adjustment, and the provision of products to a range of users through visualization software that empowers users to explore the downscaled output and its sensitivities. An additional software tool enables users to examine skill metrics and relative rankings of 21 global models for Alaska and six other domains in the Northern Hemisphere. The downscaled temperatures and precipitation are made available as calendar-month decadal means under three different greenhouse forcing scenarios through 2100 for more than 4000 communities in Alaska and western Canada. The visualization package displays the uncertainties inherent in the multi-model ensemble projections. These uncertainties are often larger than the projected changes.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.050

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.185 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations72
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental Modelling & SoftwareSame topicClimate variability and modelsFrench-language works237,207