A baseline evaluation of atmospheric and river discharge conditions in the Hudson Bay Complex during 2016–2018
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this article, we examine atmospheric and river discharge conditions within the Hudson Bay Complex for the BaySys 2016–2018 field program time frame. Investigated in particular is a subset of European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts (ECMWF) Re-Analysis - Interim (ERA-Interim) atmospheric forcing variables, namely 2-m surface temperature, 10-m surface winds, precipitation, and sea-level pressure, in addition to river discharge. Results from this assessment show that 2016 was characterized by unusually warm conditions (terrestrial and marine) throughout the annual cycle; 2017 by strong cyclone activity in March and high precipitation in January, October, and November; and 2018 by cold and windy conditions throughout the annual cycle. Evaluation of terrestrial conditions showed higher than normal land surface temperatures (the Hudson Bay physical watershed) for all of the 2016–2018 period (excluding a colder than normal spell August–November 2018), particularly in January (2016 and 2017), higher than normal precipitation in October (2016 and 2017), and higher than normal terrestrial discharge to the Hudson Bay Complex in March (2016 and 2017), with drier than average June through October (2016–2018).
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".