MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4396624749 · doi:10.1038/s41597-024-03282-4

High resolution Tibetan Plateau regional reanalysis 1961-present

2024· article· en· W4396624749 on OpenAlexaff
Peifeng Zhou, Jianping Tang, Mengnan Ma, Dabin Ji, Jiancheng Shi

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Data · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicCryospheric studies and observations
Canadian institutionsMinistry of Education and Child Care
FundersNational Key Research and Development Program of ChinaJiangsu Collaborative Innovation Center for Climate ChangeNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsPlateau (mathematics)ClimatologyPrecipitationEnvironmental scienceWeather Research and Forecasting ModelGlacierPermafrostGlobal warmingInitializationClimate changeAtmospheric sciencesPhysical geographyMeteorologyGeologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With the rapid global warming in recent decades, the Tibetan Plateau (TP) has suffered severe impacts, such as glacier retreat, glacial lake expansion, and permafrost degradation, which threaten the lives and properties of the local and downstream populations. Regional Reanalysis (RR) is vital for TP due to the limitations of observations. In this work, a 62-year (1961-2022) long atmospheric regional reanalysis with spatial resolution of 9 km (convective gray-zone scale) and temporal resolution of 1 hour over the TP (TPRR) was developed using the Weather Research and Forecasting (WRF) model, combined with re-initialization method, spectral nudging (SN), and several optimizations. TPRR is forced by ERA5 at hourly intervals. TPRR outperforms ERA5, realistically capturing climatological characteristics and seasonal variations of precipitation and T2m (air temperature at 2m above ground level). Moreover, TPRR better reproduces the frequency and intensity of precipitation, as well as the diurnal cycle of precipitation. This study also quantifies the wetting trend of 0.0071 mm/year over the TP amid global warming using TPRR.

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

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gemmano category
Domain: not available · Genre: Dataset
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Observationallow
gptno category
Domain: not available · Genre: Dataset
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Not applicablelow
models splitAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

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 categoriesInsufficient 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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.202
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.083
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.186 · 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

Labeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.

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

The models disagree on parts of this classification; every voice is preserved in the section at the end of the page.

Study designObservational · Not applicable
Domainnot available
GenreDataset

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

Citations16
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific DataSame topicCryospheric studies and observationsFrench-language works237,207