MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6930451565 · doi:10.5281/zenodo.14043453

Downscaled North American Multi-Model Ensemble Forecast for the Pacific Northwest USA

2024· dataset· en· W6930451565 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueFigshare · 2024
Typedataset
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institute of Food and Agriculture
KeywordsInitializationPrecipitationQuantitative precipitation forecastForecast skillForecast verificationEnsemble averageMean squared errorModel output statisticsForecast error

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Downscaled North American Multi-Model Ensemble Forecast of Meteorological Variables for the Pacific Northwest Monthly retrospective hindcasts (1982-2010) and forecasts (2011-2020) of temperature and precipitation are acquired for the Pacific Northwest region of the United States from five models (CFSv2, NASA GEOS5v2, CanCM4i, GEM-NEMO, and NCAR-CCSM) participating in the North American Multi-Model Ensemble project (Kirtman et al., 2014). These models, detailed in Table 1 with more recent information available in (Becker et al., 2022), are initialized monthly to provide a forecast of 0-9 months at a 1.0̊ × 1.0̊ spatial resolution. The multi-model ensemble mean (ENSMEAN) is then generated for each initialization by simply averaging all considered models and their ensemble members. Monthly ENSMEAN forecast is bias-corrected and spatially downscaled to 1/24th degree using the methodology described in Wood et al. (2002) and Barbero et al. (2017) using historical meteorological data (gridMET; Abatzoglou, 2013) as the baseline. Then, the downscaled ENSMEAN data are temporally disaggregated to daily timescales using an analog approach. The closest analog month for the ENSMEAN forecast is found from the gridMET dataset by minimizing the root mean square error (RMSE) of monthly gridMET and forecast precipitation (excluding gridMET data for the target month). Other daily meteorological variables (such as maximum and minimum temperature, maximum and minimum relative humidity, wind speed, and specific humidity) are extracted from the same analog month to use as input for the coupled crop-hydrology model. As a last step to the analog approach, the process corrects the bias between the forecast and analog month to ensure that monthly mean temperature and accumulated precipitation match those of the original forecast. Table 1. List of NMME models used to create Ensemble Mean. Model Model Expansion Ensemble Size References NCEP- CFSv2 Climate Forecast System, version 2 24 (Saha et al., 2014) NASA GEOS5v2 Goddard Earth Observing System, version 5 4 (Molod et al., 2020) CanCM4i Fourth Generation Canadian Coupled Global Climate Model 10 (Merryfield et al., 2013) GEM - NEMO Global Environmental Multiscale Model – Nucleus for European Modelling of the Ocean 10 (Lin et al., 2020) NCAR - CCSM Community Climate System Model 10 (Kirtman & Min, 2009) The dataset has *.mat files which are MATLAB data files. References Abatzoglou, J. T. (2013). Development of gridded surface meteorological data for ecological applications and modelling. International Journal of Climatology, 33(1), 121–131. https://doi.org/10.1002/joc.3413 Barbero, R., Abatzoglou, J. T., & Hegewisch, K. C. (2017). Evaluation of Statistical Downscaling of North American Multimodel Ensemble Forecasts over the Western United States. Weather and Forecasting, 32(1), 327–341. https://doi.org/10.1175/WAF-D-16-0117.1 Becker, E. J., Kirtman, B. P., L’Heureux, M., Muñoz, Á. G., & Pegion, K. (2022). A Decade of the North American Multimodel Ensemble (NMME): Research, Application, and Future Directions. Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, 103(3), E973–E995. https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-20-0327.1 Kirtman, B. P., & Min, D. (2009). Multimodel Ensemble ENSO Prediction with CCSM and CFS. Monthly Weather Review, 137(9), 2908–2930. https://doi.org/10.1175/2009MWR2672.1 Kirtman, B. P., Min, D., Infanti, J. M., Kinter, J. L., Paolino, D. A., Zhang, Q., Dool, H. van den, Saha, S., Mendez, M. P., Becker, E., Peng, P., Tripp, P., Huang, J., DeWitt, D. G., Tippett, M. K., Barnston, A. G., Li, S., Rosati, A., Schubert, S. D., … Wood, E. F. (2014). The North American Multimodel Ensemble: Phase-1 Seasonal-to-Interannual Prediction; Phase-2 toward Developing Intraseasonal Prediction. Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, 95(4), 585–601. https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-12-00050.1 Lin, H., Merryfield, W. J., Muncaster, R., Smith, G. C., Markovic, M., Dupont, F., Roy, F., Lemieux, J.-F., Dirkson, A., Kharin, V. V., Lee, W.-S., Charron, M., & Erfani, A. (2020). The Canadian Seasonal to Interannual Prediction System Version 2 (CanSIPSv2). Weather and Forecasting, 35(4), 1317–1343. https://doi.org/10.1175/WAF-D-19-0259.1 Merryfield, W. J., Lee, W.-S., Boer, G. J., Kharin, V. V., Scinocca, J. F., Flato, G. M., Ajayamohan, R. S., Fyfe, J. C., Tang, Y., & Polavarapu, S. (2013). The Canadian Seasonal to Interannual Prediction System. Part I: Models and Initialization. Monthly Weather Review, 141(8), 2910–2945. https://doi.org/10.1175/MWR-D-12-00216.1 Molod, A., Hackert, E., Vikhliaev, Y., Zhao, B., Barahona, D., Vernieres, G., Borovikov, A., Kovach, R. M., Marshak, J., Schubert, S., Li, Z., Lim, Y.-K., Andrews, L. C., Cullather, R., Koster, R., Achuthavarier, D., Carton, J., Coy, L., Friere, J. L. M., … Pawson, S. (2020). GEOS-S2S Version 2: The GMAO High-Resolution Coupled Model and Assimilation System for Seasonal Prediction. Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres, 125(5), e2019JD031767. https://doi.org/10.1029/2019JD031767 Saha, S., Moorthi, S., Wu, X., Wang, J., Nadiga, S., Tripp, P., Behringer, D., Hou, Y.-T., Chuang, H., Iredell, M., Ek, M., Meng, J., Yang, R., Mendez, M. P., Dool, H. van den, Zhang, Q., Wang, W., Chen, M., & Becker, E. (2014). The NCEP Climate Forecast System Version 2. Journal of Climate, 27(6), 2185–2208. https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-12-00823.1 Wood, A. W., Maurer, E. P., Kumar, A., & Lettenmaier, D. P. (2002). Long-range experimental hydrologic forecasting for the eastern United States. Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres, 107(D20), ACL 6-1-ACL 6-15. https://doi.org/10.1029/2001JD000659

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Dataset · Consensus signal: Dataset
Teacher disagreement score0.127
Threshold uncertainty score0.253

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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 head0.077
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.236 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreDataset

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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFigshareFrench-language works237,207