Application of Deep Learning to Estimate Atmospheric Gravity Wave Parameters in Reanalysis Data Sets
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Gravity waves play an essential role in driving and maintaining global circulation. To understand their contribution in the atmosphere, the accurate reproduction of their distribution is important. Thus, a deep learning approach for the estimation of gravity wave momentum fluxes was proposed, and its performance at 100 hPa was tested using data from low‐resolution zonal and meridional winds, temperature, and specific humidity at 300, 700, and 850 hPa in the Hokkaido region (Japan). To this end, a deep convolutional neural network was trained on 29‐year reanalysis data sets (JRA‐55 and DSJRA‐55), and the final 5‐year data were reserved for evaluation. The results showed that the fine‐scale momentum flux distribution of the gravity waves could be estimated at a reasonable computational cost. Particularly, in winter, when gravity waves are stronger, the median root means square errors (RMSEs) of the maximum momentum flux and the characteristic zonal wavenumber were 0.06–0.13 mPa and 1.0 × 10 −5 , respectively.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".