MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2808003268 · doi:10.3390/atmos9060226

A Survey of Regional-Scale Blocking Patterns and Effects on Air Quality in Ontario, Canada

2018· article· en· W2808003268 on OpenAlexaffabout
Frank Dempsey

Bibliographic record

VenueAtmosphere · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWind and Air Flow Studies
Canadian institutionsMinistry of Environment
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBlocking (statistics)Air quality indexScale (ratio)Environmental sciencePrecipitationClimatologyAir pollutantsMeteorologyWeather patternsGeographyAir pollutionClimate changeCartographyGeologyStatisticsOceanographyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Blocking weather patterns cause persistent weather situations that alter typical wind and circulation patterns which may result in stagnant weather conditions at the surface and potentially adverse conditions that affect society, such as extended warmth, drought, precipitation or fog. One problem that may develop is adverse concentrations of air pollutants in populated regions that may persist for several days or longer. This study looks for possible correlation between blocking patterns and air quality episodes in southern Ontario, Canada. The method used was examination of various cases of air quality episodes. The meteorological details of these examples were examined to determine possible correlations with blocking patterns. Results of the comparisons revealed that various types of blocking patterns correlated with worsening air quality episodes in various regions of southern Ontario. The conclusion is that some large-scale as well as regional-scale blocking patterns may cause adverse air quality in different cities or regions of the province during any month, and forecasters need to be vigilant for these patterns.

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)0.000
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.312

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.212 · 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

Citations3
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAtmosphereSame topicWind and Air Flow StudiesFrench-language works237,207