The Influence of Meteorology Initialization on Ozone Forecasting in the Great Lakes Region during MOOSE Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study investigates the influence of meteorology initialization on surface ozone prediction in the Great Lakes region using Canada’s operational air quality model (GEM-MACH) at a 2.5 km horizontal resolution. Two different initialization techniques are compared, and it is found that the four-dimensional incremental analysis updating (IAU) method yields improved model performance for surface ozone prediction. The IAU run shows better ozone regression line statistics (y = 0.7x + 14.9, R2 = 0.2) compared to the non-IAU run (y = 0.6x + 23.1, R2 = 0.1), with improved MB and NMB values (3.9 ppb and 8.9%, respectively) compared to the non-IAU run (4.1 ppb and 9.3%). Furthermore, analyzing ozone prediction sensitivity to model initialization time reveals that the 18z initialization leads to enhanced performance, particularly during high ozone exceedance days, with an improved regression slope of 0.9 compared to 0.7 for the 00z and 12z runs. The MB also improves to −0.2 ppb in the 18z run compared to −2.8 ppb and −3.9 ppb for the 00z and 12z runs, respectively. The analysis of meteorological fields reveals that the improved ozone predictions at 18z are linked to a more accurate representation of afternoon wind speed. This improvement enhances the transport of ozone, contributing to the overall improvement in ozone predictions.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".