MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4239653261 · doi:10.5194/gmd-2017-169

Coupling the Canadian Terrestrial Ecosystem Model (CTEM v. 2.0) to Environment and Climate Change Canada's greenhouse gas forecast model

2017· preprint· en· W4239653261 on OpenAlexaffabout
Bakr Badawy, Saroja Polavarapu, Dylan B. A. Jones, Feng Deng, Michael Neish, Joe R. Melton, Ray Nassar, Vivek K. Arora

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAtmospheric and Environmental Gas Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoEnvironment and Climate Change Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnvironmental scienceGreenhouse gasForcing (mathematics)ClimatologyAtmospheric sciencesClimate modelPrecipitationAtmosphere (unit)Climate changeMeteorologyGeographyGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. The Canadian Land Surface Scheme and the Canadian Terrestrial Ecosystem Model (CLASS-CTEM) together form the land surface component in the family of Canadian Earth System Models (CanESM). Here, CLASS-CTEM is coupled to Environment and Climate Change Canada (ECCC)'s weather and greenhouse gas forecast model (GEM-MACH-GHG) to consistently model atmosphere-land exchange of CO2. The coupling between the land and the atmospheric transport model ensures consistency between meteorological forcing of CO2 fluxes and CO2 transport. The procedure used to spin up carbon pools for CLASS-CTEM for multi-decadal simulations needed to be significantly altered to deal with the limited availability of consistent meteorological information from a constantly changing operational environment in the GEM-MACH-GHG model. Despite the limitations in the spin up procedure, the simulated fluxes obtained by driving the CLASS-CTEM model with meteorological forcing from GEM-MACH-GHG were comparable to those obtained from CLASS-CTEM when it is driven with standard meteorological forcing (CRU-NCEP). This is due to the similarity of the two meteorological datasets in terms of temperature and radiation. However notable discrepancies in the seasonal variation and spatial patterns of precipitation estimates, especially in the tropics, were reflected in the estimated carbon fluxes, as they significantly affected the magnitude of the vegetation productivity and, to a lesser extent, the seasonal variations in carbon fluxes. Nevertheless, the simulated fluxes based on the meteorological forcing from the GEM-MACH-GHG model are within the range of other estimates from bottom-up or top-down approaches. Indeed, when simulated fluxes obtained by driving the CLASS-CTEM model with meteorological data from the GEM-MACH-GHG model are used as prior estimates for an atmospheric CO2 inversion analysis using the adjoint of the GEOS-Chem model, the retrieved CO2 flux estimates are comparable to those obtained from other systems in terms of the global budget and the total flux estimates for the northern extratropical regions, which have good observational coverage. In data poor regions, as expected, differences in the retrieved fluxes due to the prior fluxes become apparent, but fall within the uncertainty bounds based on multi-inversion analyses. The coupling of CLASS-CTEM to an atmospheric transport model with carbon assimilation capabilities also provides insights into the limitations of CLASS-CTEM simulated CO2 fluxes through comparisons of simulated atmospheric CO2 with observations at selected flask stations. This capability can be used to continually assess and improve the terrestrial ecosystem modules of the CLASS-CTEM model.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.040
Threshold uncertainty score0.080

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.182 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAtmospheric and Environmental Gas Dynamics→French-language works237,207→