An Optimization Strategy for Identifying Parameter Sensitivity in Atmospheric and Oceanic Models
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract A new optimization strategy is proposed to identify the sensitivities of simulations of atmospheric and oceanic models to uncertain parameters. The strategy is based on a nonlinear optimization method that is able to estimate the maximum values of specific parameter sensitivity measures; meanwhile, it takes into account interactions among uncertain parameters. It is tested using the Lorenz’63 model and an intermediate complexity 2.5-layer shallow-water model of the North Pacific Ocean. For the Lorenz’63 model, it is shown that the parameter sensitivities of the model results depend on the initial conditions. For the 2.5-layer shallow-water model used to simulate the Kuroshio large meander (KLM) south of Japan, the optimization strategy reveals that the prediction of the KLM path is insensitive to the uncertainties in the bottom friction coefficient, the interfacial friction coefficient, and the lateral friction coefficient. Rather, the KLM prediction is relatively sensitive to the uncertainties of the reduced gravity representing ocean stratification and the wind stress coefficient.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".