Trends and Variability of North American Cool-Season Extratropical Cyclones: 1979–2019
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Extratropical cyclones are the primary driver of sensible weather conditions across the mid-latitudes of North America, often generating various types of precipitation, gusty non-convective winds, and severe convective storms throughout portions of the annual cycle. Given ongoing modifications of the zonal atmospheric thermal gradient due to anthropogenic forcing, analyzing the historical characteristics of these systems presents an important research question. Using the North American Regional Reanalysis, boreal cool-season (October–April) extratropical cyclones for the period 1979–2019 were identified, tracked, and classified based on their genesis location. Additionally, bomb cyclones—extratropical cyclones that recorded a latitude normalized pressure fall of 24 hPa in 24-hr—were identified and stratified for additional analysis. Cyclone lifespan across the domain exhibits a log-linear relationship, with 99% of all cyclones tracked lasting less than 8 days. On average, ≈ 270 cyclones were tracked across the analysis domain per year, with an average of ≈ 18 year−1 being classified as bomb cyclones. The average number of cyclones in the analysis domain has decreased in the last 20 years from 290 year−1 during the period 1979–1999 to 250 year−1 during the period 2000–2019. Spatially, decreasing trends in the frequency of cyclone track counts were noted across a majority of the analysis domain, with the most significant decreases found in Canada’s Northwest Territories, Colorado, and east of the Graah mountain range. No significant interannual or spatial trends were noted with bomb cyclone frequency.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".