MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3112714077 · doi:10.1029/2020gl091430

Three Western Pacific Typhoons Strengthened Fire Weather in the Recent Northwest U.S. Conflagration

2020· article· en· W3112714077 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jacob Stuivenvolt‐Allen, Shih‐Yu Wang, Matthew LaPlante, Jin‐Ho Yoon

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysical Research Letters · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicTropical and Extratropical Cyclones Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersBiological and Environmental ResearchStrategic Environmental Research and Development ProgramOffice of ScienceU.S. Department of Energy
KeywordsTyphoonExtratropical cycloneClimatologyTrough (economics)RidgeAtmospheric circulationPacific oceanTropical cycloneEnvironmental scienceGeologyOceanographyGeographyMeteorology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Strong winds that accentuated a fire outbreak in the western United States in early September of 2020 resulted from an atmospheric wave train that spanned the Pacific Ocean. Days before the atmospheric waves developed in the United States, three western Pacific tropical cyclones (typhoons) underwent an extratropical transition over Korea within an unprecedentedly short span of 12 days. Using a climate diagnostic approach and historical forecast data, it was found that the amplitude of the atmospheric waves accompanying the western U.S. fire weather would not have been so profound if not for the influence of these typhoons. Together, the recurving typhoons provided a significant source of wave activity flux directed toward North America – amplifying the ridge over the U.S. west coast while deepening the trough in central Canada. This anomalous circulation produced the severe frontal system that caused extreme winds in western Oregon, Washington and California – rapidly spreading fire.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.174
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.002

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 head0.061
GPT teacher head0.285
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.

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

Citations28
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeophysical Research LettersSame topicTropical and Extratropical Cyclones ResearchFrench-language works237,207