MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4390232005 · doi:10.4236/ajcc.2023.124030

Effect of Temperature on Frost-Free Days and Length of Crop Growing Season across Southern Ontario

2023· article· en· W4390232005 on OpenAlexaffabout
Ramesh Pall Rudra, Rituraj Shukla, Trevor Dickinson, Pradeep Goel, Jaskaran Dhiman

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Climate Change · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicClimate variability and models
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFrost (temperature)Climate changeTemperate climateGrowing seasonPrecipitationEnvironmental scienceClimatologySnowAtmospheric sciencesAgronomyGeographyBiologyEcologyGeologyMeteorology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Climate change has an impact on various climatic variables. In this study our focus is mainly on temperature characteristics of climate parameter. In temperate and humid regions like southern Ontario, the effect of climate change on Frost-free days in winter is distinctive. The average annual temperature is going upward but the extreme increase is in the winter temperature. Winter average temperature is going up by about 2˚C. However, extreme daily minimum temperature is going up by more than 3˚C. This climate effect has a great impact on the nature of precipitation and length of frost-free days. The snowfall over winter months is decreasing and the rainfall is increasing. However, the number of frost-free days during late fall months, early winter months, late winter months and early spring months are increasing. This result reveals an increase in length of the growing season. This research focuses on the effect of change in climatic variables on Frost-free days in Southern Ontario. Therefore, special attention should be given to the effect of change in climate Frost-free conditions on length of crop growing in winter season for potential investigation.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.149
Threshold uncertainty score0.801

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.250 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Climate ChangeSame topicClimate variability and modelsFrench-language works237,207