MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3090551613 · doi:10.1175/jcli-d-20-0255.1

Western North Pacific Tropical Cyclones in the Met Office Global Seasonal Forecast System: Performance and ENSO Teleconnections

2020· article· en· W3090551613 on OpenAlexaff
Xiangbo Feng, Nicholas P. Klingaman, Kevin I. Hodges, Yipeng Guo

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Climate · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicTropical and Extratropical Cyclones Research
Canadian institutionsMinistry of Education and Child Care
FundersMet OfficeNatural Environment Research CouncilSight Research UKNewton Fund
KeywordsTeleconnectionClimatologyEl Niño Southern OscillationEnvironmental scienceTropical cycloneLa NiñaGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The performance of the Met Office Global Seasonal Forecast System (GloSea5-GC2) for tropical cyclone (TC) frequency for the western North Pacific (WNP) in July–October is evaluated, using 23 years of ensemble forecasts (1993–2015). Compared to observations, GloSea5 overpredicts the climatological TC frequency in the eastern WNP and underpredicts it in the western and northern WNP. These biases are associated with an El Niño–type bias in TC-related environmental conditions (e.g., low-level convergence and steering flow), which encourages too many TCs to form throughout the tropical Pacific and slows TC propagation speed. For interannual TC frequency variability, GloSea5 overestimates the observed negative TC–ENSO teleconnection in the western and northern WNP, associated with an eastward shift in the ENSO teleconnection to environmental conditions. Consequently, GloSea5 fails to predict interannual TC variability in the northeast WNP (south of Japan); performance is higher in the southwest WNP (e.g., the South China Sea) where the sign of the TC–ENSO teleconnection is correct. This study suggests the need to reduce biases in environmental conditions and associated ENSO teleconnections in GloSea5 to improve the TC prediction performance in the NWP.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.244

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.215 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations27
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of ClimateSame topicTropical and Extratropical Cyclones ResearchFrench-language works237,207