MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2990877465 · doi:10.1029/2019jd030575

Impact of the QBO on Prediction and Predictability of the MJO Convection

2019· article· en· W2990877465 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Shuguang Wang, Michael K. Tippett, Adam H. Sobel, Zane Martin, Frédéric Vitart

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Geophysical Research Atmospheres · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicClimate variability and models
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersEnvironment and Climate Change CanadaNational Oceanic and Atmospheric AdministrationEuropean Centre for Medium-Range Weather ForecastsOffice of Naval ResearchChina Meteorological AdministrationNational Science Foundation
KeywordsMadden–Julian oscillationPredictabilityClimatologyEnvironmental scienceOscillation (cell signaling)Forecast skillQuasi-biennial oscillationConvectionAtmospheric sciencesMeteorologyGeologyStratosphereMathematicsPhysicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The impact of the quasi‐biennial oscillation (QBO) on the prediction of tropical intraseasonal convection, including the Madden Julian Oscillation (MJO) and Boreal Summer Intraseasonal Oscillation (BSISO), is assessed in the WMO Subseasonal to Seasonal (S2S) forecast database using the real‐time OLR based MJO (ROMI) index. It is shown that the ROMI prediction skill for the boreal winter MJO, measured by the maximum time at which the anomaly correlation coefficient exceeds 0.6, is higher by 5 to 10 days in the QBO easterly phase than its westerly phase. This difference occurs even in models with low tops and poorly resolved stratospheres. MJO predictability, as measured by signal to noise ratio in the S2S ensemble, also shows a similar difference between the two QBO phases, and results from a simple linear regression model show consistent behavior as well. Analysis of the ROMI index derived from observations indicates that the MJO is more coherent and stronger in the QBO easterly phase than in the westerly phase. These results suggest that the skill dependence on QBO phase results from the initial state of the MJO, the regularity of its propagation in the verifying observations, or most likely a combination of the two, but not on an actual stratospheric influence on the MJO within the model simulations. In contrast to the robust QBO‐MJO connection in boreal winter, the BSISO prediction skill exhibited by the S2S models in boreal summer is greater in the QBO westerly phase than in the easterly phase during the 1999 to 2010 period. This is consistent with the observation that BSISO OLR anomalies are stronger in the QBO westerly phase during that period. However, this relationship between the QBO and BSISO in boreal summer changes in recent decades: BSISO is weaker in QBO westerly than easterly during 1979–2000. Correspondingly, the QBO impact on BSISO prediction in boreal summer also reverses in that period as well in a statistical model, whereas this statistical model shows a consistent QBO impact on MJO prediction in boreal winter over the past four decades.

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)0.003
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.289 · 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

Citations55
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Geophysical Research Atmospheres→Same topicClimate variability and models→French-language works237,207→