MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3109703995 · doi:10.1080/07055900.2020.1845117

Cloud-to-Ground Lightning in Canada: 20 Years of CLDN Data

2020· article· en· W3109703995 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Bohdan Kochtubajda, William R. Burrows

Bibliographic record

VenueATMOSPHERE-OCEAN · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicLightning and Electromagnetic Phenomena
Canadian institutionsEnvironment and Climate Change Canada
FundersEnvironment and Climate Change Canada
KeywordsLightning (connector)Lightning detectionGeographyEnvironmental scienceClimatologyMeteorologyPhysical geographyGeologyThunderstorm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study presents the spatial and temporal features of more than 45 million cloud-to-ground (CG) lightning flashes recorded by the Canadian Lightning Detection Network for the years 1999–2018. Although sensor upgrades have improved the detection efficiency and location accuracy of CG lightning, the large-scale spatial patterns remain about the same as found in a previous study covering the years 1999–2008. Analyses, using equal-area squares with 10 km sides, describe the regional and seasonal characteristics of negative and positive flashes, the percentage and flash density of positive lightning, and the first-stroke peak currents of both polarities. Lightning activity over the provinces and territories is greatest in the summer, varying from 95.9% to 76.8% of the annual activity in the Northwest Territories and Ontario, respectively. Winter lightning is rare, usually occurring in extreme southern Ontario and the Atlantic Provinces, as well as over offshore regions west of Vancouver Island and the coastal waters off Nova Scotia. Preliminary analysis suggests that, compared with the 1999–2008 period, the majority of western and northern Canada has experienced more lightning days during the 2009–2018 period, whereas much of eastern Canada has experienced fewer lightning days. A statistical analysis performed on 154 stations across Canada found that the decadal increases (decreases) at 5 (31) stations were significant at the 90% confidence level or higher, and 4 (16) of these were significant at the 95% confidence level.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.135

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.007
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.197 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations23
Published2020
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueATMOSPHERE-OCEANSame topicLightning and Electromagnetic PhenomenaFrench-language works237,207