ArticleOcean dynamics2025
Sensitivity of global storm surge modelling to sea surface drag.
Article in Ocean dynamics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Accurate storm surge modeling is essential for predicting coastal flooding and mitigating impacts on vulnerable regions. This study evaluates the influence of different sea surface drag parameterizations on surge predictions using the Global Tide and Surge Model (GTSM) over a 10-year period (2006-2015) and two storm events. Four model experiments were tested, ranging from a fully dynamic formulation, including variable air density, atmospheric stability, and sea-state-dependent drag, to a simplified constant-drag approach. Results show that advanced drag formulations reduced the underestimation of annual maximum surge values from 18% to 12% globally, with the variable Charnock parameter contributing the most. Conversely, using a constant Charnock value and thereby neglecting wave-dependent roughness increases prediction errors, especially in regions with highly variable sea states. Case studies of Storm Xaver (2013) and Hurricane Fiona (2022) show that advanced parameterizations better capture wind stress variations, reducing root mean square error from 0.21 m to 0.16 m for Xaver and improving surge predictions by up to 0.30 m for Fiona. Consistent with earlier studies, a persistent underestimation of extreme surge events remains across all experiments. While wave-dependent roughness improves performance, no single parameter fully explains this bias. However, wave-dependent roughness particularly enhances model performance in high-latitude and storm-prone areas, where sea state and atmospheric conditions vary widely. Our results show that variations in air density and atmospheric stability have minimal impact on surge height. As such, prioritizing the implementation of dynamic, sea-state-dependent drag formulations, particularly variable Charnock, is key to further improving the accuracy of storm surge forecasting systems and future projections.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.