MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3128351327 · doi:10.3390/atmos12020224

Satellite-Derived Spatio-Temporal Distribution and Parameters of North Atlantic Polar Lows for 2015–2017

2021· article· en· W3128351327 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Pavel Golubkin, Julia Smirnova, Leonid Bobylev

Bibliographic record

VenueAtmosphere · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicClimate variability and models
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMinistry of Science and Higher Education of the Russian FederationNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
KeywordsPolarGeologyClimatologyModerate-resolution imaging spectroradiometerPolar vortexSatelliteOceanographyTroposphere

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A list of North Atlantic polar lows was compiled for 2015–2017. A total of 131 polar lows were found by analyzing the Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS) infrared imagery and auxiliary information. The study region was additionally divided by the 20° W meridian to assess possible differences in the polar lows occurring in the western and eastern parts of the region. The highest polar low activity was found over the Barents Sea and the northern Norwegian Sea. A large number of polar lows over this region were dual or multiple. When considering such systems as a single event, more polar lows were found in 2015 over the Labrador Sea and southern Davis Strait, which is the region with the second highest number of polar lows. High interannual variability of polar low frequency was noted, which was more pronounced in the western part of the region. During the analyzed period, the largest number of polar lows occurred in January for the western part of the region and in February for the eastern part. The main polar low parameters were similar within the region, with the mean values slightly higher in the western part of the region, but all extreme high values were observed in the eastern part.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.083
Threshold uncertainty score0.165

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.219 · 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

Citations18
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAtmosphereSame topicClimate variability and modelsFrench-language works237,207