MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2002172560 · doi:10.1029/2005jc003278

Modeling events of sea‐surface variability using spectral nudging in an eddy permitting model of the northeast Pacific Ocean

2006· article· en· W2002172560 on OpenAlexaff
Michael W. Stacey, Jennifer A. Shore, Daniel G. Wright, Keith R. Thompson

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Geophysical Research Atmospheres · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicOceanographic and Atmospheric Processes
Canadian institutionsDalhousie UniversityBedford Institute of OceanographyRoyal Military College of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAltimeterEddySkewnessClimatologySea-surface heightCurrent (fluid)Ocean currentGeologyMeteorologyStandard deviationEnvironmental scienceGeodesyOceanographyPhysicsTurbulenceStatisticsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Eddies are an important part of the current system that hugs the coasts of British Columbia and Alaska. The ability of “spectral nudging” to improve the eddy statistics determined from model simulations of this current system is investigated. Spectral nudging differs from standard nudging in that only specified frequency and wave number bands of the simulated potential temperature and salinity fields are nudged toward the observed climatology. Therefore the simulated eddy field can develop and evolve with time while the model is prevented from drifting far from the observed climatology. The Parallel Ocean Program (POP) is used to do the simulations, with 0.25° horizontal resolution and 23 vertical levels. The simulated standard deviation and skewness fields for the sea surface height are compared with those estimated from ten years of TOPEX/Poseidon altimetry observations. This comparison shows that spectral nudging allows the model to simulate the eddy statistics of the current system with significantly more accuracy than when the nudging is not used.

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)0.002
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 score0.047
Threshold uncertainty score0.094

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.286
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

Citations21
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Geophysical Research Atmospheres→Same topicOceanographic and Atmospheric Processes→French-language works237,207→