MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399137672 · doi:10.1016/j.dib.2024.110561

Spatial datasets of 30-year (1991–2020) average monthly total precipitation and minimum/maximum temperature for Canada and the United States

2024· article· en· W4399137672 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Heather MacDonald, Daniel W. McKenney, John Pedlar, Kevin Lawrence, Kaitlin de Boer, Michael F. Hutchinson

Bibliographic record

VenueData in Brief · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicCryospheric studies and observations
Canadian institutionsNatural Resources CanadaCanadian Forest Service
FundersNatural Resources CanadaU.S. Forest ServiceDefence Research and Development OrganisationEnvironment and Climate Change CanadaAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaNational Oceanic and Atmospheric AdministrationCanadian Forest ServiceDefence Research and Development CanadaGreat Lakes Fishery Commission
KeywordsPrecipitationMaximum temperatureGeographyEnvironmental scienceStatisticsClimatologyMeteorologyMathematicsGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Thin plate smoothing spline models, covering Canada and the continental United States, were developed using ANUSPLIN for 30-year (1991-2020) monthly mean maximum and minimum temperature and precipitation. These models employed monthly weather station values from the North American dataset published by National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's (NOAA's) National Centers for Environmental Information (NCEI). Maximum temperature mean absolute errors (MAEs) ranged between 0.54 °C and 0.64 °C (approaching measurement error), while minimum temperature MAEs were slightly higher, varying from 0.87 °C to 1.0 °C. On average, thirty-year precipitation estimates were accurate to within approximately 10 % of total precipitation levels, ranging from 9.0 % in the summer to 12.2 % in the winter. Error rates were higher in Canada compared to estimates in the United States, consistent with a less dense station network in Canada relative to the United States. Precipitation estimates in Canada exhibited MAEs representing 14.7 % of mean total precipitation compared to 9.7 % in the United States. The datasets exhibited minimal bias overall; 0.004 °C for maximum temperature, 0.01 °C for minimum temperature, and 0.5 % for precipitation. Winter months showed a greater dry bias (0.8 % of total winter precipitation) compared to other seasons (-0.4 % of precipitation). These 30-year gridded datasets are available at ∼2 km resolution.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: Dataset
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.062

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.010
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0020.001
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.208 · 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 designNot 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

Citations4
Published2024
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueData in BriefSame topicCryospheric studies and observationsFrench-language works237,207