A Hail Climatology for Canada Using a Lightning Proxy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Hail is a significant weather hazard in Canada, but its spatial and temporal distribution is poorly understood. We compiled a Canadian hail report database for 2005–22, containing 7000 unique entries with estimates of the timing and location of the hail reports and estimated hail diameter. We developed a methodology to construct an estimate of the hail climatology across Canada using manual hail observations at airports and a lightning proxy. First, we estimated the probability of hail occurrence at airport locations across the country at any given hour using Bayesian inference. Next, we interpolated in space the probabilities to obtain smooth prior probabilities of hail occurrence at any location in Canada. Then, we refined these probabilities using lightning flash density as a proxy for the likelihood of hail, severe hail (diameter greater than 20 mm), or significant severe hail (diameter greater than 50 mm). Finally, we aggregated the posterior probabilities of hail, severe hail, and significant severe hail over time and space and compared them with the number of reports found in the 2005–22 Canadian hail database. Our results indicate that the posterior probabilities of hail are not consistent with the observed hail reports and suggest that there are many gaps in hail reporting in Canada.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".