MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7008078913

Assimilation of satellite based rainfall estimates with the Canadian Precipitation Analysis

2014· dissertation· en· W7008078913 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueMspace (University of Manitoba) · 2014
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPrenatal Screening and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSatellitePrecipitationData assimilationEstimationDefense Meteorological Satellite ProgramClimate modelGeostationary Operational Environmental Satellite
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Canadian Precipitation Analysis (CaPA) produces a gridded product by assimilating data from stations and the Global Environmental Multiscale (GEM) model. This project assesses the performance of the satellite based rainfall estimates for Canada, and the results of their assimilation with CaPA. The satellite based estimates considered are those from the Climate Prediction Center Morphing method (CMORPH) and Precipitation Estimation from Remotely Sensed Information using Artificial Neural Networks (PERSIANN). Relative to the Second Generation of Daily Adjusted Precipitation for Canada (APC2), all satellite products are shown to generally underestimate rainfall, however convective events result in an overestimation. Skill scores show that the satellite products possess the most skill for eastern Canada and decreasingly so westward. When assimilated with CaPA, the satellite products express decreased skill for light rainfall and potential improvements for larger events. While central Canada experiences the greatest improvements, all regions benefit the most from June through August.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score0.056

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.204 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMspace (University of Manitoba)→Same topicPrenatal Screening and Diagnostics→French-language works237,207→