Probabilistic versus deterministic skill in predicting the western North Pacific‐East Asian summer monsoon variability with multimodel ensembles
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Based on historical forecasts of three quasi‐operational multimodel ensemble (MME) systems, this study assesses the superiority of coupled MME over contributing single‐model ensembles (SMEs) and over uncoupled atmospheric MME in predicting the Western North Pacific‐East Asian summer monsoon variability. The probabilistic and deterministic forecast skills are measured by Brier skill score (BSS) and anomaly correlation (AC), respectively. A forecast‐format‐dependent MME superiority over SMEs is found. The probabilistic forecast skill of the MME is always significantly better than that of each SME, while the deterministic forecast skill of the MME can be lower than that of some SMEs. The MME superiority arises from both the model diversity and the ensemble size increase in the tropics, and primarily from the ensemble size increase in the subtropics. The BSS is composed of reliability and resolution, two attributes characterizing probabilistic forecast skill. The probabilistic skill increase of the MME is dominated by the dramatic improvement in reliability, while resolution is not always improved, similar to AC. A monotonic resolution‐AC relationship is further found and qualitatively explained, whereas little relationship can be identified between reliability and AC. It is argued that the MME's success in improving the reliability arises from an effective reduction of the overconfidence in forecast distributions. Moreover, it is examined that the seasonal predictions with coupled MME are more skillful than those with the uncoupled atmospheric MME forced by persisting sea surface temperature (SST) anomalies, since the coupled MME has better predicted the SST anomaly evolution in three key regions.
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 | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".