Impacts of parameterized orographic drag on the <scp>N</scp>orthern <scp>H</scp>emisphere winter circulation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract A recent intercomparison exercise proposed by the Working Group for Numerical Experimentation (WGNE) revealed that the parameterized, or unresolved, surface stress in weather forecast models is highly model‐dependent, especially over orography. Models of comparable resolution differ over land by as much as 20% in zonal mean total subgrid surface stress ( τ tot ). The way τ tot is partitioned between the different parameterizations is also model‐dependent. In this study, we simulated in a particular model an increase in τ tot comparable with the spread found in the WGNE intercomparison. This increase was simulated in two ways, namely by increasing independently the contributions to τ tot of the turbulent orographic form drag scheme (TOFD) and of the orographic low‐level blocking scheme (BLOCK). Increasing the parameterized orographic drag leads to significant changes in surface pressure, zonal wind and temperature in the Northern Hemisphere during winter both in 10 day weather forecasts and in seasonal integrations. However, the magnitude of these changes in circulation strongly depends on which scheme is modified. In 10 day forecasts, stronger changes are found when the TOFD stress is increased, while on seasonal time scales the effects are of comparable magnitude, although different in detail. At these time scales, the BLOCK scheme affects the lower stratosphere winds through changes in the resolved planetary waves which are associated with surface impacts, while the TOFD effects are mostly limited to the lower troposphere. The partitioning of τ tot between the two schemes appears to play an important role at all time scales.
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 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".