MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3213260462 · doi:10.1029/2021gl095824

Predictable Pattern of Precipitation Over Asian Summer Monsoon Regions

2021· article· en· W3213260462 on OpenAlexaff
Xiaojing Li, Youmin Tang

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysical Research Letters · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicClimate variability and models
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Northern British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPredictabilityClimatologyPrecipitationMonsoonEnvironmental scienceIndian Ocean DipoleEmpirical orthogonal functionsBayEl Niño Southern OscillationEast Asian MonsoonGeologyMeteorologyGeographyOceanography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Precipitation prediction has been a challenging issue. The predictable pattern of Asian summer monsoon (ASM) precipitation is identified by the average predictable time method and precipitation hindcasts from the European Centre For Medium Range Weather Forecasts. The leading predictable pattern is characterized by a dipole pattern with the first center spanning from the northeast Bay of Bengal eastward to the western North Pacific, and the opposite center mainly in the Maritime Continent. It provides skillful prediction up to 21–24 days, far exceeding the skill averaged over the ASM (less than 5 days). Empirical mode decomposition analysis shows that the intraseasonal component, contributing 55% of the total variance of predictable components, provides the most predictability for ASM precipitation. The intraseasonal component originates from the boreal summer intraseasonal oscillation, which is enhanced by local ocean‐atmosphere interactions. The interannual component originating from the El Niño‐Southern Oscillation strengthens the predictability.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.270 · 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 venueGeophysical Research Letters→Same topicClimate variability and models→French-language works237,207→