MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4281764690 · doi:10.1175/mwr-d-22-0028.1

Latent Heat Nudging in the Canadian High-Resolution (2.5 km) Regional Deterministic Prediction System

2022· article· en· W4281764690 on OpenAlexaffabout
Dominik Jacques, Daniel Michelson

Bibliographic record

VenueMonthly Weather Review · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicMeteorological Phenomena and Simulations
Canadian institutionsEnvironment and Climate Change Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPrecipitationEnvironmental scienceMean squared errorRelative humidityClimatologyLatent heatMeteorologyMathematicsStatisticsGeographyGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This study examines the application of latent heat nudging (LHN) for the assimilation of radar-derived precipitation rates in the 2.5-km High-Resolution Deterministic Prediction System (HRDPS) operated by Environment and Climate Change Canada. One goal of this study is to document the overall impact of applying LHN in the most recent operational implementation of the HRDPS. On average, for 110 forecasts conducted over a 2-month period in 2016, LHN is shown to improve a composite NWP index (measuring the average change in RMSE over many variables and observation types) by ∼1.5% compared to a control experiment with no LHN. For winds between 400 and 100 hPa, reductions in RMSE between 1% and 4% are found for lead times up to 48 h. For precipitation, improvements for lead times up to 6 h are shown. Another goal of this study is to quantify the relative contributions for certain components of the LHN implementation. The features being investigated are the inclusion of LHN within the assimilation cycle, the use of idealized heating profiles and the conservation of relative humidity. The 2-month forecasting experiments are conducted with these components deactivated in turn. By comparing these experiments, it is found that the inclusion of LHN in the assimilation cycle has the largest impact. It is also found that the use of idealized profiles in locations where precipitation is observed but not simulated is a critical aspect of this implementation of LHN. A case study is also provided to illustrate the impact of LHN on altitude winds.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.503
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.183 · 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.

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

Citations2
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMonthly Weather ReviewSame topicMeteorological Phenomena and SimulationsFrench-language works237,207