MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4417147657 · doi:10.1002/met.70133

Neighborhood‐Based Verification of Precipitation Forecasts at the Local Scale: An Application Over Southern Quebec

2025· article· en· W4417147657 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueMeteorological Applications · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicMeteorological Phenomena and Simulations
Canadian institutionsMinistère des Ressources naturelles et des ForêtsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPrecipitationForecast verificationMetric (unit)Numerical weather predictionQuantitative precipitation forecastForecast skillGridIntensity (physics)Scale (ratio)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT The emergence of high‐resolution numerical weather prediction (NWP) systems over recent decades has brought new verification challenges, namely accounting for the “double penalty” effect. While spatial verification methods have been developed to mitigate this issue, they generally provide domain‐wide performance assessments, potentially obscuring spatial heterogeneity in the NWP performances. This study introduces a novel methodology for evaluating the NWP performances at the local scale within a neighborhood‐based framework. Local contingency tables are constructed for each cell of the grid, populated with events occurring within a defined neighborhood window, allowing for the compensation of spatial location errors. These local contingency tables are then temporally aggregated across a set of forecasts to produce a temporal local contingency table at each grid point, thereby enabling localized performance assessment. The methodology was applied to a large region centered in Southern Quebec using forecasts from six NWP systems (GDPS, RDPS, HRDPS, GFS, NAM, and RAP) over a 2‐year period (2022–2023). Analyses were conducted across four precipitation intensity thresholds (0.1, 5, 10, and 25 mm/6 h) and three forecast lead‐time categories (Days 1–2, 3–4, and 5–7 combined, depending on data availability). Four metrics were employed in the evaluation: Bias, false alarm ratio (FAR), probability of detection (POD), and equitable threat score (ETS). The performance is primarily governed by the precipitation intensity threshold, with forecast skill deteriorating as the threshold increases, particularly, for intense and extreme events. Although forecast lead‐time has a secondary yet nonnegligible influence, spatial variability of metric values becomes increasingly pronounced at higher intensity thresholds, despite certain limitations in evaluating extreme precipitation events. Notably, the evaluation at the local scale and the delineation of homogeneous regions proved particularly valuable at the 5 mm/6 h threshold, underscoring the relevance of localized verification approaches for moderate precipitation events.

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.

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 categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.582
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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.232 · 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