MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403035717 · doi:10.1175/bams-d-23-0111.1

Decadal Prediction Centers Prepare for a Major Volcanic Eruption

2024· article· en· W4403035717 on OpenAlexaff
Reinel Sospedra‐Alfonso, William J. Merryfield, Matthew Toohey, Claudia Timmreck, Jean-Paul Vernier, Ingo Bethke, Yiguo Wang, Roberto Bilbao, Markus G. Donat, Pablo Ortega, Jason N. S. Cole, W.‐S. Lee, Thomas L. Delworth, David Paynter, Fanrong Zeng, Liping Zhang, Myriam Khodri, Didier Swingedouw, Olivier Torres, Shuai Hu, Wenmin Man, Meng Zuo, Leon Hermanson, Doug Smith, Takahito Kataoka, Hiroaki Tatebe

Bibliographic record

VenueBulletin of the American Meteorological Society · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicScience and Climate Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of SaskatchewanEnvironment and Climate Change Canada
FundersDeutsche ForschungsgemeinschaftTrond Mohn stiftelseEuropean CommissionMet OfficeNorges ForskningsrådMinistry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and TechnologyDepartment for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, UK Government
KeywordsVolcanoGeologyVulcanian eruptionSeismologyEarth scienceMeteorologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The World Meteorological Organization’s Lead Centre for Annual-to-Decadal Climate Prediction issues operational forecasts annually as guidance for regional climate centers, climate outlook forums, and national meteorological and hydrological services. The occurrence of a large volcanic eruption such as that of Mount Pinatubo in 1991, however, would invalidate these forecasts and prompt producers to modify their predictions. To assist and prepare decadal prediction centers for this eventuality, the Volcanic Response activities under the World Climate Research Programme’s Atmospheric Processes and Their Role in Climate (APARC) and the Decadal Climate Prediction Project (DCPP) organized a community exercise to respond to a hypothetical large eruption occurring in April 2022. As part of this exercise, the Easy Volcanic Aerosol forcing generator was used to provide stratospheric sulfate aerosol optical properties customized to the configurations of individual decadal prediction models. Participating centers then reran forecasts for 2022–26 from their original initialization dates and, in most cases, also from just before the eruption at the beginning of April 2022, according to two candidate response protocols. This article describes various aspects of this APARC/DCPP Volcanic Response Readiness Exercise (VolRes-RE), including the hypothesized volcanic event, the modified forecasts under the two protocols from the eight contributing centers, the lessons learned during the coordination and execution of this exercise, and the recommendations to the decadal prediction community for the response to an actual eruption. Significance Statement Decadal climate predictions crucially fill a gap between seasonal forecasts, which typically cover the coming 6–12 months, and long-term climate projections that extend to 2100 and beyond. Multimodel decadal predictions issued annually by the World Meteorological Organization are generally skillful but could be invalidated if a large climate-altering volcanic eruption like that of Mount Pinatubo in 1991 were to occur. These predictions can in principle be modified by each contributing center to include estimates of stratospheric aerosol radiative influences stemming from the eruption. However, an effective and timely response requires planning and international coordination. This paper describes an effort to develop such a framework through a practical exercise under which decadal prediction centers respond to a hypothetical major eruption.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.059

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0180.005

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.242 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBulletin of the American Meteorological SocietySame topicScience and Climate StudiesFrench-language works237,207