MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2095526031 · doi:10.1175/2008mwr2625.1

Predicting Mesoscale Variability of the North Atlantic Using a Physically Motivated Scheme for Assimilating Altimeter and Argo Observations

2008· article· en· W2095526031 on OpenAlexafffund
Yimin Liu, Keith R. Thompson

Bibliographic record

VenueMonthly Weather Review · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicOceanographic and Atmospheric Processes
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersCanadian Foundation for Climate and Atmospheric Sciences
KeywordsArgoMesoscale meteorologyAltimeterTemperature salinity diagramsCovarianceClimatologyEnvironmental scienceMeteorologySea-surface heightTransformation (genetics)SalinityComputer scienceGeologyStatisticsMathematicsOceanographyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A computationally efficient scheme is described for assimilating sea level measured by altimeters and vertical profiles of temperature and salinity measured by Argo floats. The scheme is based on a transformation of temperature, salinity, and sea level into a set of physically meaningful variables for which it is easier to specify spatial covariance functions. The scheme also allows for sequential correction of temperature and salinity biases and online estimation of background error covariance parameters. Two North Atlantic applications, both focused on predicting mesoscale variability, are used to assess the effectiveness of the scheme. In the first application the background is a monthly temperature and salinity climatology and skill is assessed by how well the scheme recovers Argo profiles that were not assimilated. In the second application the backgrounds are short-term forecasts made by an eddy-permitting model of the North Atlantic. Skill is assessed by the quality of forecasts with lead times of 1–60 days. Both applications show that the scheme has useful skill.

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 score0.071
Threshold uncertainty score0.304

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.184 · 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

Citations2
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMonthly Weather ReviewSame topicOceanographic and Atmospheric ProcessesFrench-language works237,207