Assimilation of RAPID array observations into an ocean model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Experiments assimilating the RAPID dataset of deep temperature and salinity profiles at 26.5°N on the western and eastern Atlantic boundaries into a 1° global NEMO ocean model have been performed. The meridional overturning circulation (MOC) is then assessed against the transports calculated directly from observations. The best initialization found for this short period was obtained by assimilating the EN3 upper‐ocean hydrography database prior to 2004, after which different methods of assimilating 5‐day average RAPID profiles at the western boundary were tested. The model MOC is strengthened by ∼ 2 Sv giving closer agreement with the RAPID array transports, when the western boundary profiles are assimilated only below 900 m (the approximate depth of the Florida Straits, which are not well resolved) and when the T,S observations are spread meridionally from 10 to 35°N along the deep western boundary. The use of boundary‐focused covariances has the largest impact on the assimilation results, otherwise using more conventional Gaussian covariances has a very local impact on the MOC at 26°N with strong adverse impacts on the MOC stream function at higher and lower latitudes. Even using boundary‐focused covariances only enables the MOC to be strengthened for ∼ 2 years, after which the increased transport of warm waters leads to a negative feedback on water formation in the subpolar gyre which then reduces the MOC. This negative feedback can be mitigated if EN3 hydrography data continue to be assimilated along with the RAPID array boundary data. Copyright © 2012 Royal Meteorological Society and Crown in the right of Canada.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".