Southern Annular Mode Dynamics in Observations and Models. Part II: Eddy Feedbacks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Many global climate models (GCMs) have trouble simulating southern annular mode (SAM) variability correctly, particularly in the Southern Hemisphere summer season where it tends to be too persistent. In this two-part study, a suite of experiments with the Canadian Middle Atmosphere Model (CMAM) is analyzed to improve the understanding of the dynamics of SAM variability and its deficiencies in GCMs. Here, an examination of the eddy–mean flow feedbacks is presented by quantification of the feedback strength as a function of zonal scale and season using a new methodology that accounts for intraseasonal forcing of the SAM. In the observed atmosphere, in the summer season, a strong negative feedback by planetary-scale waves, in particular zonal wavenumber 3, is found in a localized region in the southwest Pacific. It cancels a large proportion of the positive feedback by synoptic- and smaller-scale eddies in the zonal mean, resulting in a very weak overall eddy feedback on the SAM. CMAM is deficient in this negative feedback by planetary-scale waves, making a substantial contribution to its bias in summertime SAM persistence. Furthermore, this bias is not alleviated by artificially improving the climatological circulation, suggesting that climatological circulation biases are not the cause of the planetary wave feedback deficiency in the model. Analysis of the summertime eddy feedbacks in the models from phase 5 of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP5) confirms that this is indeed a common problem among GCMs, suggesting that understanding this planetary wave feedback and the reason for its deficiency in GCMs is key to improving the fidelity of simulated SAM variability in the summer season.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".