MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6999829734

Detecting Climate Change over Canadian Prairies

2017· other· en· W6999829734 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueCSUN ScholarWorks (California State University, Northridge) · 2017
Typeother
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPrecipitationDew pointRelative humidityClimate changeAir temperatureDewWeather station
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT\nDetecting Climate Change over Canadian Prairies\n\nBy\nMartin Ponce\nThis research paper looks to see how rising temperatures have affected precipitation frequency in the prairies of Canada by examining day to day weather station records based on the duration of record keeping at the stations (at least a minimum of 25 years) from 1955-2015. Ten weather stations meet the criteria; two stations in Alberta, three stations in Manitoba and five stations in Saskatchewan. For each station, seasonal trends and a correlation analysis of six climatic variables are examined they include air temperature, dew point temperature, relative humidity, precipitation total, precipitation frequency and precipitation intensity. Results show that air temperature trends are increasing, dew point temperature is mainly increasing, relative humidity is increasing, precipitation total is decreasing, precipitation frequency is both increasing and decreasing while precipitation intensity is also increasing and decreasing depending on locations. Correlation seems to be strongest with dew point temperature and relative humidity while very weak with air temperature when looking at how each variable affects precipitation total, precipitation frequency and precipitation intensity.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.093

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.217 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCSUN ScholarWorks (California State University, Northridge)French-language works237,207