Tropical rainfall predictions from multiple seasonal forecast systems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We quantify seasonal prediction skill of tropical winter rainfall in 14 climate forecast systems. High levels of seasonal prediction skill exist for year‐to‐year rainfall variability in all tropical ocean basins. The tropical East Pacific is the most skilful region, with very high correlation scores, and the tropical West Pacific is also highly skilful. Predictions of tropical Atlantic and Indian Ocean rainfall show lower but statistically significant scores. We compare prediction skill (measured against observed variability) with model predictability (using single forecasts as surrogate observations). Model predictability matches prediction skill in some regions but it is generally greater, especially over the Indian Ocean. We also find significant inter‐basin connections in both observed and predicted rainfall. Teleconnections between basins due to El Niño–Southern Oscillation (ENSO) appear to be reproduced in multi‐model predictions and are responsible for much of the prediction skill. They also explain the relative magnitude of inter‐annual variability, the relative magnitude of predictable rainfall signals and the ranking of prediction skill across different basins. These seasonal tropical rainfall predictions exhibit a severe wet bias, often in excess of 20% of mean rainfall. However, we find little direct relationship between bias and prediction skill. Our results suggest that future prediction systems would be best improved through better model representation of inter‐basin rainfall connections as these are strongly related to prediction skill, particularly in the Indian and West Pacific regions. Finally, we show that predictions of tropical rainfall alone can generate highly skilful forecasts of the main modes of extratropical circulation via linear relationships that might provide a useful tool to interpret real‐time forecasts.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".