Reducing a Tropical Cyclone Weak-Intensity Bias in a Global Numerical Weather Prediction System
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The operational Canadian Global Deterministic Prediction System suffers from a weak-intensity bias for simulated tropical cyclones. The presence of this bias is confirmed in progressively simplified experiments using a hierarchical system development technique. Within a semi-idealized, simplified-physics framework, an unexpected insensitivity to the representation of relevant physical processes leads to investigation of the model's semi-Lagrangian dynamical core. The root cause of the weak-intensity bias is identified as excessive numerical dissipation caused by substantial off-centering in the two time-level time integration scheme used to solve the governing equations. Any (semi-)implicit semi-Lagrangian model that employs such off-centering to enhance numerical stability will be afflicted by a misalignment of the pressure gradient force in strong vortices. Although the associated drag is maximized in the tropical cyclone eyewall, the impact on storm intensity can be mitigated through an intercomparison-constrained adjustment of the model's temporal discretization. The revised configuration is more sensitive to changes in physical parameterizations and simulated tropical cyclone intensities are improved at each step of increasing experimental complexity. Although some rebalancing of the operational system may be required to adapt to the increased effective resolution, significant reduction of the weak-intensity bias will improve the quality of Canadian guidance for global tropical cyclone forecasting.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".