Impact of Adjusted and Nonadjusted Surface Observations on the Cold Season Performance of the Canadian Precipitation Analysis (CaPA) System
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The Canadian Precipitation Analysis System (CaPA) is an operational system that uses a combination of weather gauge and ground-based radar measurements together with short-term forecasts from a numerical weather model to provide near-real-time estimates of 6- and 24-h precipitation amounts. During the winter season, many gauge measurements are rejected by the CaPA quality control process because of the wind-induced undercatch for solid precipitation. The goal of this study is to improve the precipitation estimates over central Canada during the winter seasons from 2019 to 2022. Two approaches were tested. First, the quality control procedure in CaPA has been relaxed to increase the number of surface observations assimilated. Second, the automatic solid precipitation measurements were adjusted using a universal transfer function to compensate for the undercatch problem. Although increasing the wind speed threshold resulted in lower amounts and worse biases in frequency, the overall precipitation estimates are improved as the equitable threat score is improved because of a substantial decrease in the false alarm ratio, which compensates the degradation of the probability of detection. The increase of solid precipitation amounts using a transfer function improves the biases in both frequency and amounts and the probability of detection for all precipitation thresholds. However, the false alarm ratio deteriorates for large thresholds. The statistics vary from year to year, but an overall improvement is demonstrated by increasing the number of stations and adjusting the solid precipitation amounts for wind speed undercatch.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".