MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2781976050 · doi:10.5194/gmd-2017-276

The Climate Generator: Stochastic climate representation forglacial cycle integration

2018· article· en· W2781976050 on OpenAlexafffund
Mohammad Arif, Lev Tarasov, Tristan Hauser

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicClimate variability and models
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsDownscalingClimatologyEnvironmental scienceClimate modelQuantileClimate changeNoise (video)Forcing (mathematics)PrecipitationMeteorologyComputer scienceGeologyMathematicsStatisticsGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. This paper presents a computationally efficient stochastic approach to simulate atmospheric fields (specifically monthly mean temperature and precipitation) on large spatial-temporal scales. In analogy with Weather Generators (WG), the modelling approach can be considered a Climate Generator (CG). The CG can also be understood as a field-specific General Circulation climate Model (GCM) emulator. It invokes aspects of spatio-temporal downscaling, in this case mapping the output of an Energy Balance climate Model (EBM) to that of a higher resolution GCM. The CG produces a synthetic climatology conditioned on various inputs. These inputs include sea level temperature from a fast low-resolution EBM, surface elevation, ice mask, atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide, methane, orbital forcing, latitude and longitude. Bayesian Artificial Neural Networks (BANN) are used for nonlinear regression against GCM output over North America, Antarctica and Eurasia. Herein we detail and validate the methodology. To impose natural variability in the CG (to make the CG indistinguishable from a GCM) stochastic noise is added to each prediction. This noise is generated from a normal distribution with standard deviation computed from the 10 % and 90 % quantiles of the predictive distribution values from the BANNs for each time step. This derives from a key working assumption/approximation that the self-inferred predictive uncertainty of the BANNs is in good part due to the internal variability of the GCM climate. Our CG is trained against GCM (FAMOUS and CCSM) output for the last deglacial interval (22 ka to present year). For predictive testing, we compare the CG predictions against GCM (FAMOUS) output for the disjoint remainder of the last glacial interval (120 ka to 22.05 ka). The CG passes a climate Turing test, an indistinguishability test in analogy with the original Turing test for artificial intelligence. This initial validation of the Climate Generator approach justifies further development and testing for long time integration contexts such as coupled ice-sheet climate modelling over glacial cycle 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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.020
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.258 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicClimate variability and models→French-language works237,207→