MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3190761477 · doi:10.1002/qj.4139

Numerical discretization causing error variance loss and the need for inflation

2021· article· en· W3190761477 on OpenAlexaff
Richard Ménard, Sergey Skachko, Olivier Pannekoucke

Bibliographic record

VenueQuarterly Journal of the Royal Meteorological Society · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicMeteorological Phenomena and Simulations
Canadian institutionsEnvironment and Climate Change Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDiscretizationCovarianceMathematicsData assimilationVariance inflation factorCovariance matrixApplied mathematicsPropagation of uncertaintyCovariance functionVariance (accounting)AdvectionStatisticsMathematical analysisMeteorologyPhysicsRegression analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The effects of model discretization errors on the propagation of error covariance have a more complex nature than the effect on the state variable. The analysis is carried out for the advection transport equation, where the continuous (in space and time) propagation of the related error covariance function can be written, solved and compared with the discrete model applied to the covariance matrix. The numerical analysis of the problem is carried out with a 1D‐problem, but is also illustrated with a 3D chemical transport model (CTM) used for chemical data assimilation. It is shown that variance loss (compared to the continuous propagation solution) depends on the covariance function itself as well as the numerical discretization scheme. The variance loss is particularly sensitive to the correlation length. In a simple first‐order discretization, an analytical expression is obtained and is used to derive an analytical expression for inflation. Experiments show, for example, that following an analysis over a dense network of observations (with spatially uncorrelated errors) a significant variance loss occurs in the propagation step. With the (variance) inflation scheme, we are able to restore the variance lost at each grid point, and at each timestep, during the entire integration. The variance inflation scheme applied to an EnKF can be formulated to change the variance spread of the ensemble or to act directly on the state.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.170
Threshold uncertainty score0.376

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.218 · 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 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

Citations21
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueQuarterly Journal of the Royal Meteorological SocietySame topicMeteorological Phenomena and SimulationsFrench-language works237,207