MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2971984598 · doi:10.1029/2019ms001781

Modernization of Atmospheric Physics Parameterization in Canadian NWP

2019· article· en· W2971984598 on OpenAlexaffabout
Ron McTaggart‐Cowan, Paul Vaillancourt, Ayrton Zadra, S. Chamberland, Martin Charron, Shawn Corvec, Jason A. Milbrandt, Danahé Paquin‐Ricard, Alain Patoine, Michel Roch, Leo Šeparović, Jing Yang

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Advances in Modeling Earth Systems · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicMeteorological Phenomena and Simulations
Canadian institutionsEnvironment and Climate Change Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNumerical weather predictionSuiteMeteorologyAtmospheric physicsComputer scienceScale (ratio)Environmental sciencePhysicsGeographyAtmosphere (unit)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Atmospheric physics is represented in numerical models by parameterizations that use resolved‐scale information to estimate the effects of physical processes on the atmospheric state. Over time, our understanding of these processes improves, new techniques are introduced to represent physics in a numerical model, and increased resolution changes the relative importance of different parameterizations within the system. As a result, the physical parameterization packages of numerical weather prediction (NWP) models undergo regular updates as older schemes are replaced with newer ones that offer an improved, and often more complex, depiction of relevant physical processes. Such changes are typically combined with a rebalancing of the physics suite because of strong interactions between parameterization schemes and the presence of compensating errors in the system. In this study, a major update to the package of physical parameterizations used in Canadian operational NWP is introduced. The primary goals of this effort were to improve the global energy budget and to facilitate an increase in the vertical resolution of operational configurations. Both of these objectives were achieved, along with a significant improvement in guidance quality for global and regional prediction systems.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.980
Threshold uncertainty score0.183

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.213 · 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

Citations114
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Advances in Modeling Earth SystemsSame topicMeteorological Phenomena and SimulationsFrench-language works237,207