From California’s Extreme Drought to Major Flooding: Evaluating and Synthesizing Experimental Seasonal and Subseasonal Forecasts of Landfalling Atmospheric Rivers and Extreme Precipitation during Winter 2022/23
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract California experienced a historic run of nine consecutive landfalling atmospheric rivers (ARs) in three weeks’ time during winter 2022/23. Following three years of drought from 2020 to 2022, intense landfalling ARs across California in December 2022–January 2023 were responsible for bringing reservoirs back to historical averages and producing damaging floods and debris flows. In recent years, the Center for Western Weather and Water Extremes and collaborating institutions have developed and routinely provided to end users peer-reviewed experimental seasonal (1–6 month lead time) and subseasonal (2–6 week lead time) prediction tools for western U.S. ARs, circulation regimes, and precipitation. Here, we evaluate the performance of experimental seasonal precipitation forecasts for winter 2022/23, along with experimental subseasonal AR activity and circulation forecasts during the December 2022 regime shift from dry conditions to persistent troughing and record AR-driven wetness over the western United States. Experimental seasonal precipitation forecasts were too dry across Southern California (likely due to their overreliance on La Niña), and the observed above-normal precipitation across Northern and Central California was underpredicted. However, experimental subseasonal forecasts skillfully captured the regime shift from dry to wet conditions in late December 2022 at 2–3 week lead time. During this time, an active MJO shift from phases 4 and 5 to 6 and 7 occurred, which historically tilts the odds toward increased AR activity over California. New experimental seasonal and subseasonal synthesis forecast products, designed to aggregate information across institutions and methods, are introduced in the context of this historic winter to provide situational awareness guidance to western U.S. water managers.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".