MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7115575516 · doi:10.3390/jmse13122379

Evaluating Model-Simulated Monthly Sea Levels During 1993–2023 in the Northwest Atlantic: Influence of Model Resolution and Data Assimilation

2025· article· en· W7115575516 on OpenAlexafffundabout

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Marine Science and Engineering · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicOceanographic and Atmospheric Processes
Canadian institutionsDalhousie UniversityBedford Institute of OceanographyEnvironment and Climate Change CanadaFisheries and Oceans Canada
FundersFisheries and Oceans CanadaEnvironment and Climate Change CanadaDalhousie University
KeywordsData assimilationAltimeterTide gaugeMixed layerSea levelAmplitudeAssimilation (phonology)Deep convection

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study evaluates monthly sea levels during 1993–2023 from four ocean models using tide gauge and altimeter data in the Northwest Atlantic with its shelf seas, including the Gulf of Maine, Scotian Shelf, Gulf of St. Lawrence, and the Newfoundland and Labrador Shelf. The evaluation is carried out for four different aspects: the multi-decadal mean and linear trend, seasonal cycle, and the de-trended and de-seasonalized anomalies. Overall, the high-resolution model with advanced data assimilation (GLORYS12v1) possesses skills in all four aspects. The other three models show different discrepancies in reproducing the observed sea level variations relative to GLORYS12v1. They possess low or no skills for the timing (despite reasonable standard deviations) of sea level anomalies at time scales longer than 20 months along the coast, and at all time scales on the shelf, over the shelf break, and in the deep ocean. Without data assimilation, the models with high and medium resolutions show biases in the time-mean sea levels in the Labrador Sea that can be attributed to the simulated stronger and weaker deep convection (deeper and shallower mixed layer depth), respectively. The medium-resolution model, using a different data assimilation approach than GLORYS12v1, shows biases in the seasonal amplitude and multi-decadal trends.

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)0.002
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 score0.199
Threshold uncertainty score0.205

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.241 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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