Modeling North Atlantic Nor'easters With Modern Wave Forecast Models
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Three state‐of‐the‐art operational wave forecast model systems are implemented on fine‐resolution grids for the Northwest Atlantic. These models are: (1) a composite model system consisting of SWAN implemented within WAVEWATCHIII ® (the latter is hereafter, WW3) on a nested system of traditional structured grids, (2) an unstructured grid finite‐volume wave model denoted “SWAVE,” using SWAN physics, and (3) an unstructured grid finite element wind wave model denoted as “WWM” (for “wind wave model”) which uses WW3 physics. Models are implemented on grid systems that include relatively large domains to capture the wave energy generated by the storms, as well as including fine‐resolution nearshore regions of the southern Gulf of Maine with resolution on the scale of 25 m to simulate areas where inundation and coastal damage have occurred, due to the storms. Storm cases include three intense midlatitude cases: a spring Nor'easter storm in May 2005, the Patriot's Day storm in 2007, and the Boxing Day storm in 2010. Although these wave model systems have comparable overall properties in terms of their performance and skill, it is found that there are differences. Models that use more advanced physics, as presented in recent versions of WW3, tuned to regional characteristics, as in the Gulf of Maine and the Northwest Atlantic, can give enhanced results.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".