MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406873984 · doi:10.3390/jmse13020239

Performance Assessment of a Coupled Circulation–Wave Modelling System for the Northwest Atlantic

2025· article· en· W4406873984 on OpenAlexafffund
Colin Hughes, Jinyu Sheng, William Perrie, Guoqiang Liu

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Marine Science and Engineering · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicOceanographic and Atmospheric Processes
Canadian institutionsBedford Institute of OceanographyFisheries and Oceans CanadaDalhousie University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaOcean Frontier Institute
KeywordsCirculation (fluid dynamics)ClimatologyOceanographyEnvironmental scienceGeologyMeteorologyGeographyMechanicsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present a modified version of a coupled circulation–wave modelling system for the northwest Atlantic (CWMS-NWA) by including additional physics associated with wave–current interactions. The latest modifications include a parameterization of Langmuir turbulence and surface flux of turbulent kinetic energy from wave breaking in vertical mixing. The performance of the modified version of CWMS-NWA during Hurricane Arthur in 2014 is assessed using in situ measurements and satellite data. Several error statistics are used to evaluate the model performance, including correlation (R), root mean square error (RMSE), normalized model variance of model errors (γ2) and relative bias (RB). It is found that the simulated surface waves (R ≈ 94.0%, RMSE ≈ 27.5 cm, γ2≈ 0.16) and surface elevations (R ≈ 97.3%, RMSE ≈ 24.0 cm, γ2≈ 0.07) are in a good agreement with observations. The large-scale circulation, hydrography and associated storm-induced changes in the upper ocean during Arthur are reproduced satisfactorily by the modified version of CWMS-NWA. Relative to satellite observations of the daily averaged sea surface temperature (SST), the model reproduces large-scale features as demonstrated by the error metrics: R ≈ 97.8%, RMSE ≈ 1.6 °C and RB ≈ 8.6 × 10−3°C.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.069
Threshold uncertainty score0.137

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.196
Teacher spread0.187 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Marine Science and EngineeringSame topicOceanographic and Atmospheric ProcessesFrench-language works237,207