The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Monsoons: Processes, predictability, and the prospects for prediction
Abstract
The Tropical Ocean‐Global Atmosphere (TOGA) program sought to determine the predictability of the coupled ocean‐atmosphere system. The World Climate Research Programme's (WCRP) Global Ocean‐Atmosphere‐Land System (GOALS) program seeks to explore predictability of the global climate system through investigation of the major planetary heat sources and sinks, and interactions between them. The Asian‐Australian monsoon system, which undergoes aperiodic and high amplitude variations on intraseasonal, annual, biennial and interannual timescales is a major focus of GOALS. Empirical seasonal forecasts of the monsoon have been made with moderate success for over 100 years. More recent modeling efforts have not been successful. Even simulation of the mean structure of the Asian monsoon has proven elusive and the observed ENSO‐monsoon relationships has been difficult to replicate. Divergence in simulation skill occurs between integrations by different models or between members of ensembles of the same model. This degree of spread is surprising given the relative success of empirical forecast techniques. Two possible explanations are presented: difficulty in modeling the monsoon regions and nonlinear error growth due to regional hydrodynamical instabilities. It is argued that the reconciliation of these explanations is imperative for prediction of the monsoon to be improved. To this end, a thorough description of observed monsoon variability and the physical processes that are thought to be important is presented. Prospects of improving prediction and some strategies that may help achieve improvement are discussed.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Tipping elements in the Earth’s climate system
Lenton, T. M., Held, H., Kriegler, E., Hall, J. W., Lucht, W., Rahmstorf, S., & Schellnhuber, H. J. (2008) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.0705414105 · Cited by 3,982
Global fatal landslide occurrence from 2004 to 2016
Froude, M. J., & Petley, D. N. (2018) · Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences · doi:10.5194/nhess-18-2161-2018 · Cited by 2,339
Coupled ocean–atmosphere dynamics in the Indian Ocean during 1997–98
Webster, P. J., Moore, A. M., Loschnigg, J. P., & Leben, R. R. (1999) · Nature · doi:10.1038/43848 · Cited by 2,144
Self-citationMapping vulnerability to multiple stressors: climate change and globalization in India
O’Brien, K., Leichenko, R., Kelkar, U., Venema, H., Aandahl, G., Tompkins, H., Javed, A., Bhadwal, S., Barg, S., Nygaard, L., et al. (2004) · Global Environmental Change · doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2004.01.001 · Cited by 1,187
Holocene changes in eastern tropical Pacific climate inferred from a Galápagos lake sediment record
Conroy, J. L., Overpeck, J. T., Cole, J. E., Shanahan, T. M., & Steinitz-Kannan, M. (2008) · Quaternary Science Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.quascirev.2008.02.015 · Cited by 712
Metadata
- Authors
- Webster, P. J., Magaña, V. O., Palmer, T. N., Shukla, J., Tomas, R. A., Yanai, M., & Yasunari, T.
- Venue
- Journal of Geophysical Research: Oceans
- Publisher
- American Geophysical Union (AGU)
- Published
- 1998-06-29
- Volume
- 103
- Issue
- C7
- Pages
- 14451-14510
- ISSN
- 0148-0227 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2078852068
- Cited by
- 2,946
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 44.27
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Monsoons: Processes, predictability, and the prospects for prediction. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1029/97jc02719
- The paper
- Webster, P. J., Magaña, V. O., Palmer, T. N., Shukla, J., Tomas, R. A., Yanai, M., & Yasunari, T. (1998). Monsoons: Processes, predictability, and the prospects for prediction. Journal of Geophysical Research: Oceans. https://doi.org/10.1029/97jc02719
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.