MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3155442134 · doi:10.1029/2020gl092147

Long‐Range Forecasting as a Past Value Problem: Untangling Correlations and Causality With Scaling

2021· article· en· W3155442134 on OpenAlexaff
Lenin Del Rio Amador, S. Lovejoy

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysical Research Letters · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicClimate variability and models
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTeleconnectionCausality (physics)Granger causalityEconometricsRange (aeronautics)Statistical physicsMultivariate statisticsScalingClimatologyMathematicsStatisticsPhysicsGeologyEl Niño Southern Oscillation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Conventional long‐range weather prediction is an initial value problem that uses the current state of the atmosphere to produce ensemble forecasts. Purely stochastic predictions for long‐memory processes are “past value” problems that use historical data to provide conditional forecasts. Teleconnection patterns, defined from cross‐correlations, are important for identifying possible dynamical interactions, but they do not necessarily imply causation. Using the precise notion of Granger causality, we show that for long‐range stochastic temperature forecasts, the cross‐correlations are only relevant at the level of the innovations–not temperatures. This justifies the Stochastic Seasonal to Interannual Prediction System (StocSIPS) that is based on a (long memory) fractional Gaussian noise model. Extended here to the multivariate case (m‐StocSIPS) produces realistic space‐time temperature simulations. Although it has no Granger causality, emergent properties include realistic teleconnection networks and El Niño events and indices.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.027
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.027
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.005
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
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 head0.061
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.247 · 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

Citations24
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeophysical Research Letters→Same topicClimate variability and models→French-language works237,207→