MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3013445680 · doi:10.1029/2020jd032696

Probabilistic Spatial Meteorological Estimates for Alaska and the Yukon

2020· article· en· W3013445680 on OpenAlexaffabout
Andrew J. Newman, Martyn Clark, Andrew W. Wood, J. R. Arnold

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Geophysical Research Atmospheres · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicClimate variability and models
Canadian institutionsCanmore Museum and Geoscience CentreUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersNational Science Foundation
KeywordsPrecipitationEnvironmental scienceClimatologySnowTerrainStandard deviationSpatial variabilityArcticMeteorologyGeologyGeographyStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract It is challenging to develop observationally based spatial estimates of meteorology in Alaska and the Yukon. Complex topography, frozen precipitation undercatch, and extremely sparse in situ observations all limit our capability to produce accurate spatial estimates of meteorological conditions. In this Arctic environment, it is necessary to develop probabilistic estimates of precipitation and temperature that explicitly incorporate spatiotemporally varying uncertainty and bias corrections. In this paper we exploit the recently developed ensemble Climatologically Aided Interpolation (eCAI) system to produce daily historical estimates of precipitation and temperature across Alaska and the Yukon Territory at a 2 km grid spacing for the time period 1980–2013. We extend the previous eCAI method to address precipitation gauge undercatch and wetting loss, which is of high importance for this high‐latitude region where much of the precipitation falls as snow. Leave‐one‐out cross‐validation shows our ensemble has little bias in daily precipitation and mean temperature at the station locations, with an overestimate in the daily standard deviation of precipitation. The ensemble is statistically reliable compared to climatology and can discriminate precipitation events across different precipitation thresholds. Long‐term mean loss adjusted precipitation is up to 36% greater than the unadjusted estimate in windy areas that receive a large fraction of frozen precipitation, primarily due to wind induced undercatch. Comparing the ensemble mean climatology of precipitation and temperature to PRISM and Daymet v3 shows large interproduct differences, particularly in precipitation across the complex terrain of southeast and northern Alaska.

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)0.002
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 score0.131
Threshold uncertainty score0.261

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.324
Teacher spread0.265 · 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

Citations22
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Geophysical Research Atmospheres→Same topicClimate variability and models→French-language works237,207→