Mean surface topography of the northwest Atlantic: Comparison of estimates based on satellite, terrestrial gravity, and oceanographic observations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The accuracy of a new mean sea surface topography (MSST) of the northwest Atlantic is assessed. The MSST is estimated from 12 years of altimeter observations referenced with respect to a new regional geoid based on a blend of Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment (GRACE), terrestrial, and altimeter‐derived gravity data. The new MSST is first compared to a recently published mean surface topography calculated using an eddy‐permitting model of the North Atlantic. Geostropic currents calculated from the GRACE‐based MSST are next compared to mean surface currents in the northwest Atlantic estimated from the motion of near‐surface drifters corrected for surface Ekman effects. Finally, the mean path of the Gulf Stream is compared to the line of zero skewness of sea level variability which provides a measure of the mean path of unstable, intense ocean currents. Overall the agreement amongst the various estimates of surface topography and circulation is excellent. There are, however, some significant differences that can be separately attributed to problems with the MSST and, in some cases, with the ocean model (in particular the ocean climatology to which it was nudged).
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".