Effect of ENSO Phase on Large-Scale Snow Water Equivalent Distribution in a GCM
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Understanding links between the El Niño–Southern Oscillation (ENSO) and snow would be useful for seasonal forecasting, as well as for understanding natural variability and interpreting climate change predictions. Here, a 545-yr run of the third climate configuration of the Met Office Unified Model (HadCM3), with prescribed external forcings and fixed greenhouse gas concentrations, is used to explore the impact of ENSO on snow water equivalent (SWE) anomalies. In North America, positive ENSO events reduce the mean SWE and skew the distribution toward lower values, and vice versa during negative ENSO events. This is associated with a dipole SWE anomaly structure, with anomalies of opposite sign centered in western Canada and the central United States. In Eurasia, warm episodes lead to a more positively skewed distribution and the mean SWE is raised. Again, the opposite effect is seen during cold episodes. In Eurasia the largest anomalies are concentrated in the Himalayas. These correlations with February SWE distribution are seen to exist from the previous June–July–August (JJA) ENSO index onward, and are weakly detected in 50-yr subsections of the control run, but only a shifted North American response can be detected in the analysis of the 40-yr ECMWF Re-Analysis (ERA-40). The ENSO signal in SWE from the long run could still contribute to regional predictions, although it would only be a weak indicator.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".