Evaluation of Reanalyses over British Columbia. Part I: Daily and Extreme 2-m Temperature
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Weather-station data coverage, quality, and completeness across British Columbia, Canada, degrade outside of population centers and as one goes back in time. This data paucity motivates the search for the best reanalysis to serve as a climatological reference dataset. This study focuses on how well reanalyses represent 2-m temperature (T2M). Systematic error, random error, and two-sample Kolmogorov–Smirnov statistics of daily maximum and minimum T2M are evaluated from the European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts interim reanalysis (ERA-Interim), the Climate Forecast System Reanalysis (CFSR), the Japanese 55-year Reanalysis (JRA-55), and the Modern-Era Retrospective Analysis for Research and Applications, version 2 (MERRA-2). Also evaluated are the 2- and 30-yr return levels of T2M, which are estimated by the method of L moments from a fitted generalized extreme value (GEV) distribution. Reanalyses are compared with observations from 57 meteorological stations distributed over the complex terrain of British Columbia from 1980 to 2010. Minimum temperatures are better captured than maximum temperatures by all four reanalyses. JRA-55 and ERA-Interim generally perform better across all metrics. Biases are largely explained by poor reanalysis terrain representation. Statistical stationarity over the 30-yr period is assessed by using Gaussian and GEV distributions fitted with and without time-dependent parameters. It is determined that stationary distributions are sufficient to represent the climate of T2M for this region and time period.
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 | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".