MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3206564585 · doi:10.1029/2021gl094407

Forecasting the Indian Ocean Dipole With Deep Learning Techniques

2021· article· en· W3206564585 on OpenAlexaff
Jun Liu, Youmin Tang, Yanling Wu, Tang Li, Qiang Wang, Dake Chen

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysical Research Letters · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicOceanographic and Atmospheric Processes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Northern British Columbia
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsConvolutional neural networkPredictabilityDeep learningComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceAnomaly (physics)Indian Ocean DipoleMachine learningClimatologySea surface temperatureGeologyMathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In the present research, Indian Ocean Dipole (IOD) prediction was explored using statistical methods based on deep learning techniques. First, convolutional neural network (CNN) models were trained using sea‐surface temperature anomaly (SSTA) maps of the Indian Ocean from 1854 to 1989, and the properly trained CNN models were then validated with the period from 1991 to 2019. The results indicate that the deep learning approach is capable of forecasting the IOD at lead times up to 7 months. The forecast skills of CNN are superior to those of the dynamic models in the North American Multi‐Model Ensemble (NMME). The CNN outperforms the NMME with lower sensitivity to predictability barriers and fewer systematic errors. Moreover, the gradient heat map analysis demonstrates that the triggering precursors selected by CNN models for IOD events are novel and physically sensible. These results suggest the CNN to be a new and effective tool for both IOD prediction and comprehension.

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 score0.411
Threshold uncertainty score0.588

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.228 · 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

Citations50
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeophysical Research LettersSame topicOceanographic and Atmospheric ProcessesFrench-language works237,207