MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7100364438

Collision of a Pineapple Express with an Arctic Outbreak over Complex Terrains

2015· article· en· W7100364438 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocioeconomic Development in MENA
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStormTerrainArcticWarm frontSevere weatherAdvectionNumerical weather predictionThe arctic
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The interaction of a moisture-laden Pacific southwesterly flow, known as “Pineapple Express”, with very cold air from a strong arctic outbreak during 1 – 5 December 2007 produced a record number of high impact weather events across British Columbia of Canada. Among the weather hazards are bitterly cold wind chills, heavy snow, freezing rain, heavy rain, and strong winds. The unusual collision of two contrasting air masses caused unprecedented forecast challenges for both the Global Environmental Multiscale (GEM) models and meteorologists at the Pacific Storm Prediction Centre (PSPC) of Environment Canada. In this study, the evolution of the weather systems and the observed severe weather events during this storm cycle are analyzed. Weather forecasts by the GEM models and PSPC meteorologists are compared with the observed high impact weather events during the storm. It is demonstrated that meteorologists at PSPC greatly improved the model forecasts by considering various local effects of the complex terrain in British Columbia that the GEM models cannot resolve well. In particular, with warm advection aloft, it is acknowledged that the GEM regional model tends to underestimate the cold air entrenched in some narrow valleys. The model guidance was therefore doomed to failure at forecasting the widespread and prolonged freezing rain in the midst of the storm.

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 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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.510
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.083
GPT teacher head0.341
Teacher spread0.258 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSocioeconomic Development in MENAFrench-language works237,207