MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4212877782 · doi:10.1080/07055900.2022.2038071

Recherche en Prévision Numérique Contributions to Numerical Weather Prediction

2022· article· fr· W4212877782 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Hal Ritchie, Stéphane Bélair, Natacha B. Bernier, Mark Buehner, Martin Charron, Vincent Fortin, Louis Garand, P. L. Houtekamer, Syed Zahid Husain, Stéphane Laroche, Jean‐François Lemieux, Hai Lin, Ron McTaggart‐Cowan, Jason A. Milbrandt, Herschel L. Mitchell, P. Pellerin, Janusz A. Pudykiewicz, Leo Šeparović, G. C. Moore Smith, Monique Tanguay, Paul Vaillancourt

Bibliographic record

VenueATMOSPHERE-OCEAN · 2022
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicMeteorological Phenomena and Simulations
Canadian institutionsEnvironment and Climate Change Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNumerical weather predictionData assimilationWeather predictionMeteorologyComputer scienceNorth American Mesoscale ModelNumerical modelsRange (aeronautics)Ensemble forecastingEnvironmental scienceGlobal Forecast SystemComputer simulationGeographyAerospace engineeringSimulationEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This is a review article invited by Atmosphere-Ocean to document the contributions of Recherche en Prévision Numérique (RPN) to Numerical Weather Prediction (NWP). It is structured as a historical review and documents RPN’s contributions to numerical methods, numerical modelling, data assimilation, and ensemble systems, with a look ahead to potential future systems. Through this review, we highlight the evolution of RPN’s contributions. We begin with early NWP efforts and continue through to environmental predictions with a broad range of applications. This synthesis is intended to be a helpful reference, consolidating developments and generating broader interest for future work on NWP in Canada.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.683
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0720.001

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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.243 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations4
Published2022
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueATMOSPHERE-OCEANSame topicMeteorological Phenomena and SimulationsFrench-language works237,207