MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2105100550 · doi:10.1175/jcli-d-11-00205.1

Do Climate Models Capture the Tropical Influences on North Pacific Sea Surface Temperature Variability?

2011· article· en· W2105100550 on OpenAlexafffund
Fabian Lienert, John C. Fyfe, William J. Merryfield

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Climate · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicClimate variability and models
Canadian institutionsEnvironment and Climate Change CanadaUniversity of Victoria
FundersCanadian Foundation for Climate and Atmospheric Sciences
KeywordsClimatologyPacific decadal oscillationForcing (mathematics)Sea surface temperatureMixed layerEnvironmental scienceEl Niño Southern OscillationClimate modelTropicsClimate changeOceanographyGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This study evaluates the ability of global climate models to reproduce observed tropical influences on North Pacific Ocean sea surface temperature variability. In an ensemble of climate models, the study finds that the simulated North Pacific response to El Niño–Southern Oscillation (ENSO) forcing is systematically delayed relative to the observed response because of winter and spring mixed layers in the North Pacific that are too deep and air–sea feedbacks that are too weak. Model biases in mixed layer depth and air–sea feedbacks are also associated with a model mean ENSO-related signal in the North Pacific whose amplitude is overestimated by about 30%. The study also shows that simulated North Pacific variability has more power at lower frequencies than is observed because of model errors originating in the tropics and extratropics. Implications of these results for predictions on seasonal, decadal, and longer time scales are discussed.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.214 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations18
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of ClimateSame topicClimate variability and modelsFrench-language works237,207