MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3089801253 · doi:10.1088/1748-9326/abbc3b

Modeling cloud-to-ground lightning probability in Alaskan tundra through the integration of Weather Research and Forecast (WRF) model and machine learning method

2020· article· en· W3089801253 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jiaying He, Tatiana Loboda

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Research Letters · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFire effects on ecosystems
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
KeywordsWeather Research and Forecasting ModelTundraEnvironmental scienceMeteorologyLightning (connector)ClimatologyAtmospheric sciencesNumerical weather predictionArcticGeographyGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Wildland fires exert substantial impacts on tundra ecosystems of the high northern latitudes (HNL), ranging from biogeochemical impact on climate system to habitat suitability for various species.Cloud-to-ground (CG) lightning is the primary ignition source of wildfires.It is critical to understand mechanisms and factors driving lightning strikes in this cold, treeless environment to support operational modeling and forecasting of fire activity.Existing studies on lightning strikes primarily focus on Alaskan and Canadian boreal forests where land-atmospheric interactions are different and, thus, not likely to represent tundra conditions.In this study, we designed an empirical-dynamical method integrating Weather Research and Forecast (WRF) simulation and machine learning algorithm to model the probability of lightning strikes across Alaskan tundra between 2001 and 2017.We recommended using Thompson 2-moment and Mellor-Yamada-Janjic schemes as microphysics and planetary boundary layer parameterizations for WRF simulations in the tundra.Our modeling and forecasting test results have shown a strong capability to predict CG lightning probability in Alaskan tundra, with the values of area under the receiver operator characteristics curves above 0.9.We found that parcel lifted index and vertical profiles of atmospheric variables, including geopotential height, dew point temperature, relative humidity, and velocity speed, important in predicting lightning occurrence, suggesting the key role of convection in lightning formation in the tundra.Our method can be applied to data-scarce regions and support future studies of fire potential in the HNL.

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 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)0.005
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.727
Threshold uncertainty score0.623

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.115
GPT teacher head0.340
Teacher spread0.225 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations16
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental Research LettersSame topicFire effects on ecosystemsFrench-language works237,207