MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2117998036 · doi:10.1002/2015gl064360

Exploring the impact of CMIP5 model biases on the simulation of North Atlantic decadal variability

2015· article· en· W2117998036 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Matthew Menary, Dan Hodson, Jon Robson, Rowan Sutton, Richard Wood, Jonathan A. Hunt

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysical Research Letters · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicClimate variability and models
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Environment Research CouncilSight Research UK
KeywordsOcean gyreClimatologyAnomaly (physics)Environmental scienceTemperature salinity diagramsClimate modelEnsemble averageData assimilationCoupled model intercomparison projectClimate changeSalinityGeologyOceanographySubtropicsMeteorologyGeographyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Instrumental observations, paleoproxies, and climate models suggest significant decadal variability within the North Atlantic subpolar gyre (NASPG). However, a poorly sampled observational record and a diversity of model behaviors mean that the precise nature and mechanisms of this variability are unclear. Here we analyze an exceptionally large multimodel ensemble of 42 present‐generation climate models to test whether NASPG mean state biases systematically affect the representation of decadal variability. Temperature and salinity biases in the Labrador Sea covary and influence whether density variability is controlled by temperature or salinity variations. Ocean horizontal resolution is a good predictor of the biases and the location of the dominant dynamical feedbacks within the NASPG. However, we find no link to the spectral characteristics of the variability. Our results suggest that the mean state and mechanisms of variability within the NASPG are not independent. This represents an important caveat for decadal predictions using anomaly assimilation methods.

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)0.004
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 score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.065

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.307
GPT teacher head0.379
Teacher spread0.072 · 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

Citations129
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeophysical Research LettersSame topicClimate variability and modelsFrench-language works237,207