MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The GCM–Reality Intercomparison Project for SPARC (GRIPS): Scientific Issues and Initial Results

2000· article· en· W2035913201 on OpenAlexaff
Steven Pawson, Kunihiko Kodera, Kevin Hamilton, Theodore G. Shepherd, S. R. Beagley, Byron A. Boville, John D. Farrara, T. D. Fairlie, Akio Kitoh, W. A. Lahoz, Ulrike Langematz, Elisa Manzini, David Rind, Adam A. Scaife, Kiyotaka Shibata, P. Simon, Richard Swinbank, Lawrence L. Takacs, R. J. Wilson, J. A. Al‐Saadi, M. Amodei, Mirei Chiba, Lawrence Coy, J. de Grandpré, Richard S. Eckman, Michael Fiorino, W. L. Grose, Hiroshi Koide, John N. Koshyk, D. Li, J. Lerner, J. D. Mahlman, N. A. McFarlane, Carlos R. Mechoso, Andrea Molod, A. O’Neill, R. Bradley Pierce, William J. Randel, Richard B. Rood, Fanghua Wu

Bibliographic record

VenueBulletin of the American Meteorological Society · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicAtmospheric Ozone and Climate
Canadian institutionsUniversity of VictoriaUniversity of TorontoYork University
FundersGoddard Space Flight CenterEuropean CommissionUniversities Space Research AssociationScheme for Promotion of Academic and Research CollaborationNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
KeywordsStratosphereTropopauseAtmosphere (unit)Climate modelTroposphereClimatologyEnvironmental scienceGCM transcription factorsAtmospheric modelMeteorologyAtmospheric sciencesClimate changeGeneral Circulation ModelGeologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To investigate the effects of the middle atmosphere on climate, the World Climate Research Programme is supporting the project “Stratospheric Processes and their Role in Climate” (SPARC). A central theme of SPARC, to examine model simulations of the coupled troposphere–middle atmosphere system, is being performed through the initiative called GRIPS (GCM-Reality Intercomparison Project for SPARC). In this paper, an overview of the objectives of GRIPS is given. Initial activities include an assessment of the performance of middle atmosphere climate models, and preliminary results from this evaluation are presented here. It is shown that although all 13 models evaluated represent most major features of the mean atmospheric state, there are deficiencies in the magnitude and location of the features, which cannot easily be traced to the formulation (resolution or the parameterizations included) of the models. Most models show a cold bias in all locations, apart from the tropical tropopause region where they can be either too warm or too cold. The strengths and locations of the major jets are often misrepresented in the models. Looking at three-dimensional fields reveals, for some models, more severe deficiencies in the magnitude and positioning of the dominant structures (such as the Aleutian high in the stratosphere), although undersampling might explain some of these differences from observations. All the models have shortcomings in their simulations of the present-day climate, which might limit the accuracy of predictions of the climate response to ozone change and other anomalous forcing.

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)0.029
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.053
Threshold uncertainty score0.153

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0290.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.004
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0040.003
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.258 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations176
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBulletin of the American Meteorological SocietySame topicAtmospheric Ozone and ClimateFrench-language works237,207