MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7161810883 · doi:10.82308/6503

An evaluation of the Canadian Regional Climate Model simulation of the 1999 to 2004 drought over the Canadian Prairies

2009· dissertation· en· W7161810883 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Trudy McCormack

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrology and Drought Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPrecipitationClimate modelClimate changeSatelliteIndex (typography)Field (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The information from the Canadian Regional Climate Model (CRCM) can be applied to improve prediction of Prairie drought in order to reduce its devastating environmental, societal, and economical effects. One can, for example, use the CRCM to investigate the importance of certain feedbacks in maintaining the drought. A necessary step before using the CRCM for such purposes is to establish how well the model reproduces observed features of the drought. In this study, satellite and surface station data from the recent and severe Canadian Prairie drought of 1999-2004 are used to compare with the model output. The absolute data fields examined include precipitation, cloud properties, and top-of-atmosphere albedo. Cloud amount-Standardized Precipitation Index (SPI) correlations, and top-of-atmosphere albedo-SPI correlations are also compared. Overall, the CRCM performs well in the areas examined and gives confidence in its usefulness as a tool to understanding Prairie drought.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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 score0.046
Threshold uncertainty score0.092

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.272 · 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
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicHydrology and Drought AnalysisFrench-language works237,207