MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4280532746 · doi:10.1016/j.cliser.2022.100303

How decadal predictions entered the climate services arena: an example from the agriculture sector

2022· article· en· W4280532746 on OpenAlexaff
Balakrishnan Solaraju-Murali, Dragana Bojović, Nube González-Reviriego, Andria Nicodemou, Marta Terrado, Louis‐Philippe Caron, Francisco J. Doblas‐Reyes

Bibliographic record

VenueClimate Services · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicClimate variability and models
Canadian institutionsOuranos
FundersEuropean Commission
KeywordsCoproductionAgricultureProduct (mathematics)Climate changeService (business)Environmental resource managementFood securityService providerBusinessGeographyPolitical scienceEnvironmental scienceMarketingPublic relationsEcologyMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Predicting the variations in climate for the coming 1-10 years is of great interest for decision makers, as this time horizon coincides with the strategic planning of stakeholders from climate-vulnerable sectors such as agriculture. This study attempts to illustrate the potential value of decadal predictions in the development of climate services by establishing interactions and collaboration with stakeholders concerned with food production and security. Building on our experience from interacting with users and the increased understanding of their needs gathered over the years through our participation in various European activities and initiatives, we developed a decadal forecast product that provides tailored and user-friendly information about multi-year dry conditions for the coming five years over global wheat harvesting regions. This study revealed that the coproduction approach, where the interaction between the user and climate service provider is established at an early stage of forecast product development, is a fundamental step to successfully provide useful and ultimately actionable information to the interested stakeholders. The study also provides insights that shed light on the reasons for the delayed entry of decadal predictions in the climate services discourse and practice, obtained from surveying climate scientists and discussing with decadal prediction experts. Finally, it shows the key challenges that this new source of climate information still faces.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.049

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.213
Teacher spread0.191 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations32
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClimate ServicesSame topicClimate variability and modelsFrench-language works237,207