Tropical Cyclone Forecasts in the DIMOSIC Project -- Medium-Range Forecast Models with Common Initial Conditions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Tropical cyclone (TC) forecast skill of the eight global medium-range forecast models which are participating in the DIMOSIC (DIfferent Models, Same Initial Conditions) project is investigated in this study. Each model was used to generate 10-day forecasts from the same initial conditions provided by the European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts. There are a total of 123 initial dates spanning in one year from June 2018 to June 2019 with a 3-day interval. The TC track and intensity forecasts are evaluated against the best track dataset. TC-related precipitation and tropical cyclogenesis forecasts are also compared to explore the differences and similarities of TC forecasts across the models. This comparison of TC forecasts allows model developers in different centers to benchmark their model against other models, with the impact of the initial condition quality removed. The verifications reveal that most models show slow-moving and right-of-track biases in their TC track forecasts. Also, a common dry bias in TC-related precipitation indicates a general deficiency in TC intensity and convection in the models which should be related to insufficient model resolution. These findings provide important references for future model developments.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".