The subgrid‐scale orographic blocking parametrization of the GEM Model
Bibliographic record
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.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".