Impact of an Eddy-Permitting Ocean Resolution on Control and Climate Change Simulations with a Global Coupled GCM
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Initial results are presented from a 150-yr control and an 80-yr transient simulation of a new global coupled climate model with an ocean model resolution of ⅓°, which is sufficient to permit ocean eddies to form. With no spinup procedure or flux correction, the coupled model remains close to radiative equilibrium, and the enhanced ocean resolution allows an improved ocean state to be simulated; this includes a general decrease in sea surface temperature errors compared to climatology and more realistic large-scale flows compared to previous lower-resolution models. However, the improvements in the atmospheric and coupled model climatology are less pronounced, with small improvements in atmospheric circulation counterbalanced by an El Niño–Southern Oscillation cycle that has peak power at too short a period and with too little power on longer time scales. With the model using exactly the same atmospheric component as a lower-resolution counterpart, the comparison gives some insight into the impact of ocean resolution on climate and suggests that a corresponding increase in atmospheric resolution may be needed before major changes to the coupled climatology are seen. The transient climate change simulation shows some important regional differences in response compared to previous lower-resolution models. A less pronounced weakening to the meridional overturning in the North Atlantic leads to a smaller decrease in northward heat transport and enhances the surface temperature increase in the northern Europe–Atlantic region by 10% over the lower-resolution model. This may be connected to processes involved in deep-water formation in the Labrador and Nordic Seas.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".