MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W174726051 · doi:10.4401/ag-3565

Analysing and combining atmospheric general circulation model simulations forced by prescribed SST: northern extratropical response

2009· article· en· W174726051 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Vincent Moron, Antonio Navarra, M. Neil Ward, Chris K. Folland, Petra Friederichs, K. Maynard, Jan Polcher‬

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of Geophysics · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicClimate variability and models
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClimatologyExtratropical cycloneAtmospheric circulationEnvironmental scienceGeopotential heightMode (computer interface)LatitudeAtmospheric modelCovarianceSea surface temperatureMiddle latitudesAtmospheric sciencesGeneral Circulation ModelGeologyMeteorologyGeographyPrecipitationClimate changeOceanographyMathematicsGeodesy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The ECHAM 3.2 (T21), ECHAM 4 (T30) and LMD (version 6, grid-point resolution with 96 longitudes × 72 latitudes) atmospheric general circulation models were integrated through the period 1961 to 1993 forced with the same observed Sea Surface Temperatures (SSTs) as compiled at the Hadley Centre. Three runs were made for each model starting from different initial conditions. The mid-latitude circulation pattern which maximises the covariance between the simulation and the observations, i.e. the most skilful mode, and the one which maximises the covariance amongst the runs, i.e. the most reproducible mode, is calculated as the leading mode of a Singular Value Decomposition (SVD) analysis of observed and simulated Sea Level Pressure (SLP) and geopotential height at 500 hPa (Z500) seasonal anomalies. A common response amongst the different models, having different resolution and parametrization should be considered as a more robust atmospheric response to SST than the same response obtained with only one model. A robust skilful mode is found mainly in December-February (DJF), and in June-August (JJA). In DJF, this mode is close to the SST-forced pattern found by Straus and Shukla (2000) over the North Pacific and North America with a wavy out-of-phase between the NE Pacific and the SE US on the one hand and the NE North America on the other. This pattern evolves in a NAO-like pattern over the North Atlantic and Europe (SLP) and in a more N-S tripole on the Atlantic and European sector with an out-of-phase between the middle Europe on the one hand and the northern and southern parts on the other (Z500). There are almost no spatial shifts between either field around North America (just a slight eastward shift of the highest absolute heterogeneous correlations for SLP relative to the Z500 ones). The time evolution of the SST-forced mode is moderatly to strongly related to the ENSO/LNSO events but the spread amongst the ensemble of runs is not systematically related at all to the intensity of Niño3.4 SST anomalies. The leading reproducible mode in JJA is clearer and more skilful for SLP than for Z500 and also seems related to the SST time evolution of tropical Pacific. It is characterised by an out-of-phase between the whole North Pacific and a horseshoe shaped area from Eastern Siberia and Gulf of Mexico. The leading OM mode found in MAM and SON, are quite close to the DJF one (at least for the modelled anomalies), but they are less skilful than in DJF. The most skilful mode (i.e. SLP-Z500 mode in DJF and SLP mode in JJA) is almost similar to the most reproducible one during these particular seasons. In MAM and SON, the SST-forced pattern is very close to the wintertime one. The warm episodes in the central and eastern tropical Pacific are then associated with negative pressure anomalies at the sea level and also at 500 hPa over the whole North Pacifkc and from SE US Coast to Western Europe (from SE US Coast to Scandinavia for Z500) and positive pressure anomalies on Central Canada, north of 55°-60°N across the North Atlantic and also over Northern Siberia (in MAM). The variance forced by SST are lower in MAM and SON than in DJF and, as suggested above, the skill of this SST-forced mode is weak in MAM and almost close to zero in SON.

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)0.004
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 score0.054
Threshold uncertainty score0.107

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.250 · 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

Citations3
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of GeophysicsSame topicClimate variability and modelsFrench-language works237,207