MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4233818872 · doi:10.5194/acp-2020-938-rc2

Referee report on Makar et al, Forest Fire Aerosol – Weather Feedbacks over Western North America Using a High-Resolution, Fully Coupled, Air-Quality Model

2020· peer-review· en· W4233818872 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Paul A. Makar

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepeer-review
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicAeolian processes and effects
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAerosolAir quality indexEnvironmental scienceMeteorologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The authors performed a detailed analysis of one-month long period of July 2019 over a part of the US and Canada. An online coupled model GEM-MACH was run with and without aerosol-clouds feedbacks and the difference in its performance was analyzed with attention paid to the regions and the episodes of vegetation fires. As a result of the analysis, the authors declare clear-cut advantages of the coupled meteorologychemistry forecasts over non-coupled ones in case of non-trivial conditions, such as biomass burning events.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.413
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.066
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.252 · 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
GenreCommentary

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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAeolian processes and effectsFrench-language works237,207