Distinguishing the effects of internal and forced atmospheric variability in climate networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. The fact that the climate on the earth is a highly complex dynamical system is well-known. In the last few decades great deal of effort has been focused on understanding how climate phenomena in one geographical region affects the climate of other regions. Complex networks are a powerful framework for identifying climate interdependencies. To further exploit the knowledge of the links uncovered via the network analysis (for, e.g., improvements in prediction), a good understanding of the physical mechanisms underlying these links is required. Here we focus on understanding the role of atmospheric variability, and construct climate networks representing internal and forced variability using the output of an ensemble of AGCM runs. A main strength of our work is that we construct the networks using MIOP (mutual information computed from ordinal patterns), which allows the separation of intraseasonal, intra-annual and interannual timescales. This gives further insight to the analysis of climatological data. The connectivity of these networks allows us to assess the influence of two main indices, NINO3.4 – one of the indices used to describe ENSO (El Niño–Southern oscillation) – and of the North Atlantic Oscillation (NAO), by calculating the networks from time series where these indices were linearly removed. A main result of our analysis is that the connectivity of the forced variability network is heavily affected by "El Niño": removing the NINO3.4 index yields a general loss of connectivity; even teleconnections between regions far away from the equatorial Pacific Ocean are lost, suggesting that these regions are not directly linked, but rather, are indirectly interconnected via El Niño, particularly at interannual timescales. On the contrary, on the internal variability network – independent of sea surface temperature (SST) forcing – the links connecting the Labrador Sea with the rest of the world are found to be significantly affected by NAO, with a maximum at intra-annual timescales. While the strongest non-local links found are those forced by the ocean, the presence of teleconnections due to internal atmospheric variability is also shown.
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 | 0.002 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".