The subgrid‐scale orographic blocking parametrization of the GEM Model
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The impact of the physical parametrization called subgrid‐scale orographic blocking, recently introduced in the physics of the Canadian Global Environmental Mutiscale (GEM) model is described. It is based on a formulation by Lott and Miller (1997) and represents the unresolved component of the drag on low‐level winds that are blocked at the flanks of mountains. The blocking term plus the gravity‐wave drag are now part of a unified parametrization of the subgrid orographic drag that became operational in the global GEM model on 11 December 2001. Results from tests made with various configurations of the model are shown, illustrating how the blocking term impacts the large‐scale flow and improves both the short‐ and the medium‐range forecasts, especially in winter. It is shown that at day 5 of the model integrations, the influence of the blocking force applied near the surface is felt by the entire tropospheric and the lower‐stratospheric circulation. A mechanism based on perturbations of the Eliassen‐Palm flux caused by the low‐level forcing is proposed to explain the vertical propagation of the signal generated by the blocking term.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 it