MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392460343 · doi:10.1175/jhm-d-23-0159.1

Spatial and Temporal Variation of Subseasonal-to-Seasonal (S2S) Precipitation Reforecast Skill across the CONUS

2024· article· en· W4392460343 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
J. R. Levey, A. Sankarasubramanian

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Hydrometeorology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicMeteorological Phenomena and Simulations
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersDirectorate for EngineeringNational Science Foundation
KeywordsPrecipitationEnvironmental scienceClimatologyMadden–Julian oscillationSpatial variabilityVariation (astronomy)SeasonalityConusSpatial distributionMeteorologyGeologyGeographyConvectionEcologyRemote sensing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Precipitation forecasts, particularly at subseasonal-to-seasonal (S2S) time scale, are essential for informed and proactive water resource management. Although S2S precipitation forecasts have been evaluated, no systematic decomposition of the skill, Nash–Sutcliffe efficiency (NSE) coefficient, has been analyzed toward understanding the forecast accuracy. We decompose the NSE of S2S precipitation forecast into its three components—correlation, conditional bias, and unconditional bias—by four seasons, three lead times (1–12, 1–22, and 1–32 days), and three models, European Centre of Medium-Range Weather Forecasts (ECMWF), National Centers for Environmental Prediction’s (NCEP) Climate Forecast System (CFS) model, and Environment and Climate Change Canada (ECCC), over the conterminous United States (CONUS). Application of a dry threshold, removal of grid cells with seasonal climatological precipitation means below 0.01 in. per day, is important as the NSE and correlations are lower across all seasons after masking areas with low precipitation values. Further, a west-to-east gradient in S2S forecast skill exists, and forecast skill was better during the winter months and for areas closer to the coast. Overall, ECMWF’s model performance was stronger than both ECCC and NCEP CFS’s performance, mainly for the forecasts issued during the fall and winter months. However, ECCC and NCEP CFS performed better for the forecast issued during the spring months and for areas further from the coast. Postprocessing using simple model output statistics could reduce both unconditional and conditional biases to zero, thereby offering better skill for regimes with high correlation. Our decomposition results show that efforts should focus on improving model parameterization and initialization schemes for climate regimes with low correlation.

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 score0.148
Threshold uncertainty score0.919

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.261
Teacher spread0.243 · 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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of HydrometeorologySame topicMeteorological Phenomena and SimulationsFrench-language works237,207