MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3044411297 · doi:10.1109/tgrs.2020.3008033

Precipitation Merging Based on the Triple Collocation Method Across Mainland China

2020· article· en· W3044411297 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicPrecipitation Measurement and Analysis
Canadian institutionsGlobal Institute for Water SecurityUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersGlobal Water FuturesState Key Laboratory of Remote Sensing ScienceChina Postdoctoral Science FoundationState Key Laboratory of Resources and Environmental Information SystemNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsMean squared errorPrecipitationScale (ratio)Computer scienceCollocation (remote sensing)Benchmark (surveying)WeightingMeteorologyAlgorithmRemote sensingEnvironmental scienceMathematicsData miningStatisticsMachine learningGeologyGeographyPhysicsGeodesyCartography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Triple collocation (TC) is a novel method for quantifying the uncertainties of three data sets with mutually independent errors and has been widely used over different geographical fields. Researches in recent years report that TC shows potential in merging multiple data sets from different sources, while the TC-based merging method has not been used over precipitation. Using the TC formulation, this study merges precipitation from the Climate Prediction Center's morphing technique (CMORPH), Precipitation Estimation from Remotely Sensed Information using Artificial Neural Networks (PERSIANN), and the fifth-generation European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts (ECMWF) Re-Analysis (ERA5). The interim ECMWF Re-Analysis (ERA-Interim) is also involved to act as the substitute of ERA5 in some specific experiments for quality comparison between them. Merged data sets are produced at 0.25 <sup xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">°</sup> ×0.25 <sup xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">°</sup> and daily resolutions from March 2000 to December 2013 over Mainland China, using ground observations from more than 2000 rain gauges as the validation benchmark. First, the effectiveness of the TC-based method for precipitation merging is assessed. Then, two weighting methods using root-mean-square error (RMSE) in logarithmic scale (log-RMSE) and modified scale (mod-RMSE) are compared because previous studies show that mod-RMSE is more suitable for characterizing errors within estimated data. Meanwhile, two merging strategies are designed, that is, merging rainfall and snowfall separately (RS) and merging precipitation directly (P). The results show that 1) all the merged products are superior to any input product which proves that the TC method is effective in precipitation merging; 2) TC-based merging generally has a better performance than dynamic Bayesian model averaging (DBMA)-based merging; 3) mod-RMSE shows worse performance in weight estimation than log-RMSE because mod-RMSE will deteriorate the impact of the underestimated inputs; and 4) RS-based merging is superior to P-based merging, and the superiority is particularly notable in winter. The RS strategy will be very helpful in improving the accuracy of precipitation estimates in cold climate such as over mountainous and high-altitude regions. Finally, the limitations of the TC method and potential solutions are discussed. This study demonstrates the great potential of the TC-based merging method in precipitation and provides insights into its application and development.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.896
Threshold uncertainty score0.797

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.232 · 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