MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2003131973 · doi:10.1175/jcli3556.1

The Monte Carlo Independent Column Approximation’s Conditional Random Noise: Impact on Simulated Climate

2005· article· en· W2003131973 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Petri Räisänen, Howard W. Barker, Jason N. S. Cole

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Climate · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicClimate variability and models
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCanadian Foundation for Climate and Atmospheric SciencesU.S. Department of Energy
KeywordsNoise (video)Monte Carlo methodRadiative transferClimate modelEnvironmental scienceCloud coverMeteorologyStatistical physicsStatisticsClimatologyMathematicsPhysicsClimate changeGeologyComputer scienceCloud computingOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The Monte Carlo Independent Column Approximation (McICA) method for computing domain-average radiative fluxes is unbiased with respect to the full ICA, but its flux estimates contain conditional random noise. Results for five experiments are used to assess the impact of McICA-related noise on simulations of global climate made by the NCAR Community Atmosphere Model (CAM). The experiment with the least noise (an order of magnitude below that of basic McICA) is taken as the reference. Two additional experiments help demonstrate how the impact of noise depends on the time interval between calls to the radiation code. Each experiment is an ensemble of seven 15-month simulations. Experiments with very high noise levels feature significant reductions to cloudiness in the lowermost model layer over tropical oceans as well as changes in highly related quantities. This bias appears immediately, stabilizes after a couple of model days, and appears to stem from nonlinear interactions between clouds and radiative heating. Outside the Tropics, insignificant differences prevail. When McICA sampling is confined to cloudy subcolumns and when, on average, 50% more samples, relative to basic McICA, are drawn for selected spectral intervals, McICA noise is much reduced and the results of the simulation are almost statistically indistinguishable from the reference. This is true both for mean fields and for the nature of fluctuations on scales ranging from 1 day to at least 30 days. While calling the radiation code once every 3 h instead of every hour allows the CAM additional time to incorporate McICA-related noise, the impact of noise is enhanced only slightly. In contrast, changing the radiative time step by itself produces effects that generally exceed the impact of McICA’s noise.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
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 score0.266
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.259 · 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.

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

Citations42
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of ClimateSame topicClimate variability and modelsFrench-language works237,207