Evaluation of Reanalyses over British Columbia. Part II: Daily and Extreme Precipitation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This study evaluates how well reanalyses represent daily and multiday accumulated precipitation (hereinafter daily PCP) over British Columbia, Canada (Part I evaluated 2-m temperature). Reanalyses are compared with observations from 66 meteorological stations distributed over the complex terrain of British Columbia, separated into climate regions byk-means clustering. Systematic error, two-sampleχ2statistic, and frequency of daily PCP occurrence are evaluated from the European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts (ECMWF) interim reanalysis (ERA-Interim), the Climate Forecast System Reanalysis (CFSR), the Japanese 55-year Reanalysis (JRA-55), and the latest Modern-Era Retrospective Analysis for Research and Applications (version 2; MERRA-2). The 2- and 30-yr return levels of daily PCP are estimated from a generalized extreme value (GEV) distribution fitted by the method of L moments, and their systematic errors are analyzed. JRA-55 and MERRA-2 generally outperform ERA-Interim and CFSR across all metrics. Biases are largely explained by poor reanalysis representation of terrain characteristics such as steepness, exposure, elevation, location of barriers, and wind speed and direction. Statistical stationarity of precipitation intensity and frequency over the 30-yr period is assessed by using confidence intervals and GEV distributions fitted with and without time-dependent parameters. It is determined that stationary distributions are sufficient to represent the climate of daily PCP 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 | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".