MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3167709781 · doi:10.5194/egusphere-egu21-15178

24 years of C3S Arctic regional reanalysis

2021· article· en· W3167709781 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Kristian Pagh Nielsen, Harald Schyberg, Xiaohua Yang, Eivind Støylen, Per Dahlgren, Bjarne Amstrup, C. Peralta, Morten Køltzow, Jelena Bojarova

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAtmospheric and Environmental Gas Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArcticClimatologyData assimilationThe arcticEnvironmental scienceClimate changeMeteorologyGeographyOceanographyGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Copernicus Climate Change Service (C3S) regional reanalysis for the Arctic consists of two datasets of Essential Climate Variables (ECVs) for the 24 year period from 1997 to 2021. The high resolution (2.5x2.5 km2) datasets cover Greenland, Iceland, Svalbard, the Barents Sea and Northern Scandinavia. Several islands in the Russian Arctic and a few islands in the Canadian Arctic are also covered. The produced datasets are freely available to all. A first subset of the data has been published on the Copernicus Data Store (CDS) in early 2021. The reanalysis is perfomed with state-of-the-art data assimilation techniques that include many local quality-controlled observations that have not been included in previously published reanalysis datasets. The weather forecasting model HARMONIE-AROME cy40h1.1.1 has been used to produce the dataset. The model computations have additionally been optimized for processes essential in the Arctic. Estimated uncertainty data have been produced at atmospheric pressure levels, and validation statistics have been made for synoptic weather stations.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.115
Threshold uncertainty score0.229

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0160.015

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.192
Teacher spread0.183 · 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 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

Citations6
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAtmospheric and Environmental Gas Dynamics→French-language works237,207→