MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389301114 · doi:10.3389/fclim.2023.1273770

Initialization shock in the ocean circulation reduces skill in decadal predictions of the North Atlantic subpolar gyre

2023· article· en· W4389301114 on OpenAlexaff
Iuliia Polkova, Didier Swingedouw, Leon Hermanson, Armin Köhl, Detlef Stammer, Doug Smith, Jürgen Kröger, Ingo Bethke, Xiaosong Yang, Liping Zhang, Dario Nicolì, Panos Athanasiadis, Mehdi Pasha Karami, Klaus Pankatz, Holger Pohlmann, Bo Wu, Roberto Bilbao, Pablo Ortega, Shuting Yang, Reinel Sospedra‐Alfonso, William J. Merryfield, Takahito Kataoka, Hiroaki Tatebe, Yukiko Imada, Masayoshi Ishii, Richard J. Matear

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Climate · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicClimate variability and models
Canadian institutionsEnvironment and Climate Change Canada
FundersHORIZON EUROPE Framework ProgrammeDepartment for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, UK GovernmentNorges ForskningsrådCommonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research OrganisationMet OfficeEuropean CommissionDepartment for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, UK GovernmentTrond Mohn stiftelseMinistry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and TechnologyUniversité de BordeauxDeutsche ForschungsgemeinschaftUK Research and Innovation
KeywordsOcean gyreInitializationClimatologyData assimilationOcean currentThermohaline circulationDownscalingEnvironmental scienceClimate modelShutdown of thermohaline circulationGeologyClimate changeOceanographyMeteorologyNorth Atlantic Deep WaterGeographyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Due to large northward heat transport, the Atlantic meridional overturning circulation (AMOC) strongly affects the climate of various regions. Its internal variability has been shown to be predictable decades ahead within climate models, providing the hope that synchronizing ocean circulation with observations can improve decadal predictions, notably of the North Atlantic subpolar gyre (SPG). Climate predictions require a starting point which is a reconstruction of the past climate. This is usually performed with data assimilation methods that blend available observations and climate model states together. There is no unique method to derive the initial conditions. Moreover, this can be performed using full-field observations or their anomalies superimposed on the model's climatology to avoid strong drifts in predictions. How critical ocean circulation drifts are for prediction skill has not been assessed yet. We analyze this possible connection using the dataset of 12 decadal prediction systems from the World Meteorological Organization Lead Centre for Annual-to-Decadal Climate Prediction. We find a variety of initial AMOC errors within the predictions related to a dynamically imbalanced ocean states leading to strongly displaced or multiple maxima in the overturning structures. This likely results in a blend of what is known as model drift and initial shock. We identify that the AMOC initialization influences the quality of the SPG predictions. When predictions show a large initial error in their AMOC, they usually have low skill for predicting internal variability of the SPG for a time horizon of 6-10 years. Full-field initialized predictions with low AMOC drift show better SPG skill than those with a large AMOC drift. Nevertheless, while the anomaly-initialized predictions do not experience large drifts, they show low SPG skill when skill also present in historical runs is removed using a residual correlation metric. Thus, reducing initial shock and model biases for the ocean circulation in prediction systems might help to improve their prediction for the SPG beyond 5 years. Climate predictions could also benefit from quality-check procedure for assimilation/initialization because currently the research groups only reveal the problems in initialization once the set of predictions has been completed, which is an expensive effort.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.057
Threshold uncertainty score0.315

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.226 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations17
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in ClimateSame topicClimate variability and modelsFrench-language works237,207