Tuning ice model parameters to improve Arctic sea-ice simulation using the ERA5 atmospheric reanalysis forcing
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Two sets of simulations for 1993–2005 are carried out with a medium-resolution ocean and sea-ice model covering the North Pacific, Arctic and North Atlantic Oceans. The first set, using the same model parameters and three different atmospheric forcing datasets (DFS5.2, JRA55-do and ERA5), all show too fast melting of Arctic in spring and summer compared with the ice concentration based on satellite remote sensing. The simulation using ERA5 obtains the smallest ice concentration (largest deviation from satellite data) in summer, and the smallest ice thickness in both summer and winter, corresponding to the largest warm bias of surface air temperature over the Arctic sea-ice. In the second set of simulations using ERA5, changing either the snow conductivity (in W m−1 K−1, from the constant value of 0.31 to 0.15 during April –September and 0.5 during October–March) or the albedo of bare puddled ice (from 0.53 to 0.63) leads to an increase in ice concentration in summer, and ice thickness in both summer and winter. The simulation using ERA5 with both parameters altered is from October 1993 to March 2023, and obtains seasonal, interannual and long-term variations of ice area generally consistent with satellite data.
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.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it