On the reliability of spatially disaggregated global ensemble rainfall forecasts, Hydrol
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ensemble rainfall forecasts are of high interest for decision making, as they provide an explicit and dynamic assessment of the uncertainty in the forecast. However, for hydrological forecasting, their low resolution currently limits their use to large watersheds. In order to bridge this gap, various implementations of the spatial statistical downscaling method proposed by Périca and Foufoula-Georgiou (1996a) were compared, bringing Environment Canada's global ensemble rainfall forecasts from a 100 by 70-km resolution down to 6 by 4-km, while increasing each pixel's rainfall variance and preserving its original mean. This was applied for nine consecutive days of summer 2009 with strong rain events over Quebec City, Canada. For comparison purposes, simpler methods were also implemented such as the bi-linear interpolation, which disaggregates global forecasts without modifying their variance. The meteorological products were evaluated, using different scores and diagrams, against observed values taken from Quebec City rain gauge network. The most important conclusions of this work are that the overall quality of the forecasts was preserved during the disaggregation procedure and that the disaggregated products using the variance-enhancing method were of similar quality than bi-linear interpolation products. However, variance and dispersion of the different members were, of course, much improved for the variance-enhanced products, compared to the bi-linear interpolation, which is a decisive advantage. Therefore, there is an interest in implementing variance-enhancing methods to disaggregate global ensemble rainfall forecasts. Key words: statistical downscaling, stochastic disaggregation, meteorological ensemble prediction system, rainfall forecasts. 1-
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 | 0.008 | 0.039 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".