MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2958396891 · doi:10.1175/jhm-d-19-0042.1

Evaluation and Bias Correction of S2S Precipitation for Hydrological Extremes

2019· article· en· W2958396891 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Hydrometeorology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrology and Watershed Management Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersEnvironment and Climate Change CanadaWuhan UniversityNorges ForskningsrådState Key Laboratory of Water Resources and Hydropower Engineering ScienceNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsPrecipitationQuantitative precipitation forecastEnvironmental scienceClimatologyStreamflowRange (aeronautics)MeteorologyScale (ratio)Reliability (semiconductor)Drainage basinGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Subseasonal to seasonal (S2S) weather forecasting has made significant advances and several products have been made available. However, to date few studies utilize these products to extend the hydrological forecast time range. This study evaluates S2S precipitation from eight model ensembles in the hydrological simulation of extreme events at the catchment scale. A superior bias correction method is used to correct the bias of S2S precipitation for hydrological forecasts, and the results are compared with direct bias correction of hydrological forecasts using raw precipitation forecasts as input. The study shows that the S2S models can skillfully forecast daily precipitation within a lead time of 11 days. The S2S precipitation data from the European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts (ECMWF), Korea Meteorological Administration (KMA), and United Kingdom’s Met Office (UKMO) models present lower mean error than that of other models and have higher correlation coefficients with observations. Precipitation data from the ECMWF, KMA, and UKMO models also perform better than that of other models in simulating multiple-day precipitation processes. The bias correction method effectively reduces the mean error of daily S2S precipitation for all models while also improving the correlation with observations. Moreover, this study found that the bias correction procedure can apply to either precipitation or streamflow simulations for improving the hydrological forecasts, even though the degree of improvement is dependent on the hydrological variables. Overall, S2S precipitation has a potential to be applied for hydrological forecasts, and a superior bias correction method can increase the forecasts’ reliability, although further studies are still needed to confirm its effect.

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.

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)0.002
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 score0.087
Threshold uncertainty score0.578

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.242 · 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