A numerical model study of the effects of interannual time scale wave propagation on the predictability of the Atlantic meridional overturning circulation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract We investigate processes leading to uncertainty in forecasts of the Atlantic meridional overturning circulation (AMOC). A climate model is used to supply initial conditions for ensemble simulations in which members initially have identical ocean states but perturbed atmosphere states. Baroclinic transports diverge on interannual time scales even though the ocean is not eddy‐permitting. Interannual fluctuations of the model AMOC in the subtropical gyre are caused by westward propagating Rossby waves. Divergence of the predicted AMOC with time occurs because the waves develop different phases in different ensemble members predominantly due to differences in eastern boundary windstress curl. These windstress fluctuations communicate with interior ocean transports via modifications to the vertical velocity and the vortex stretching term dw/dz. Consequently, errors propagate westward resulting in longer predictability times in the interior ocean compared with the eastern boundary. Another source of divergence is transport anomalies propagating along the Gulf Stream (and other boundary currents). The propagation mechanism seems to be predominantly advection by mean currents, and we show that the arrival of westward propagating waves can trigger development of these anomalies. The mean state of the AMOC has a small effect on interannual predictability in the subtropical gyre, most likely because eastern boundary windstress curl predictability is not strongly dependent on the state of the AMOC in the subtropics. Eastern boundary windstress curl was more predictable at 45°N when the AMOC was in a strongly decreasing state, but, unlike at 30°N, no mechanism was found linking windstress curl fluctuations with deep transports.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".