MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2054923071 · doi:10.1256/qj.01.158

Nonlinear singular spectrum analysis of the tropical stratospheric wind

2003· article· en· W2054923071 on OpenAlexaff
William W. Hsieh, Kevin Hamilton

Bibliographic record

VenueQuarterly Journal of the Royal Meteorological Society · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicSolar and Space Plasma Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSingular spectrum analysisNonlinear systemMode (computer interface)Altitude (triangle)Oscillation (cell signaling)PhysicsScale (ratio)Atmospheric sciencesPlane (geometry)ClimatologyMathematicsMeteorologyGeologySingular value decompositionGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The neural‐network‐based nonlinear singular spectrum analysis (NLSSA) is applied to the zonal winds in the 70–10 hPa region (roughly 20–30 km altitude) measured at near‐equatorial stations during 1956–2000. The data are pre‐filtered by the linear singular spectrum analysis (SSA), with the leading eight SSA principal components (PCs) used as inputs for the NLSSA. The NLSSA fits a curve to the data in the eight‐dimensional PC space. This NLSSA curve, when projected onto the two‐dimensional plane spanned by any two PCs, shows the relation between the two SSA PCs. As different SSA modes are associated with different time‐scales, the relations found by the NLSSA reveal the time‐scales between which there are interactions—interactions between the dominant quasi‐biennial oscillation (QBO) time‐scale of about 28 months and the first harmonic at 14 months, and between 28 months and 12 months are found. The anharmonic nature of the QBO is well represented by the NLSSA mode 1, but not by individual SSA modes. The NLSSA is also applied to the time series of the zonal‐wind acceleration. Copyright © 2003 Royal Meteorological Society.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.139
Threshold uncertainty score0.390

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.208 · 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.

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

Citations17
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueQuarterly Journal of the Royal Meteorological SocietySame topicSolar and Space Plasma DynamicsFrench-language works237,207