MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4414000571 · doi:10.1029/2025gl116416

A Diachronic Assessment of Advances in Seasonal Forecasting: Evolution of the APCC Multi‐Model Ensemble Prediction System Over the Last Two Decades

2025· article· en· W4414000571 on OpenAlexafffund
Young‐Mi Min, Chang‐Mook Lim, Jinho Yoo, Hyung‐Jin Kim, Vladimir N. Kryjov, Da-Eun Jeong, Suryun Ham, Mingyue Chen, Yi Xiao, Normand Gagnon, Ryan Muncaster, Pang‐Yen Liu, Andrea Borrelli, Hee‐Sook Ji, Johan Lee, Sera Jo, D. B. Kiktev, M. A. Tolstykh, V. A. Matyugin, Peter McLean, Andrea Molod

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysical Research Letters · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicClimate variability and models
Canadian institutionsEnvironment and Climate Change Canada
FundersKorea Meteorological AdministrationRural Development AdministrationEnvironment and Climate Change CanadaNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
KeywordsClimatologyEnvironmental scienceMeteorologyGeologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Since its establishment in 2005, the APEC Climate Center (APCC) has pioneered advancements in seasonal climate prediction through its Multi‐Model Ensemble (MME) system, integrating the world's most diverse range of dynamical climate models. Over the past two decades, APCC has incorporated long‐range forecasts from more than 60 model versions, contributed by 21 institutions across 11 countries. This study presents the first diachronic assessment of the APCC MME system evolution, focusing on operational model transitions and associated substantial 34% improvement in global forecast skill. Despite these significant advances, challenges persist, particularly in predicting precipitation over land areas in the northern extratropics and in overcoming the spring predictability barriers. Our findings underscore the crucial role of model innovation, increased diversity, and international collaboration in advancing seasonal prediction. As the first study of its kind, this work provides key insights into the evolution of climate modeling, providing a foundation for future forecasting improvements.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.048

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.341
Teacher spread0.305 · 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 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
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeophysical Research Letters→Same topicClimate variability and models→French-language works237,207→