↓ Skip to main content

Statistical Evidence for the Role of Southwestern Indian Ocean Heat Content in the Indian Summer Monsoon Rainfall

Overview of attention for article published in Scientific Reports, August 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (86th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (94th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
4 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
45 Mendeley
Title
Statistical Evidence for the Role of Southwestern Indian Ocean Heat Content in the Indian Summer Monsoon Rainfall
Published in
Scientific Reports, August 2018
DOI 10.1038/s41598-018-30552-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

T. Venugopal, M. M. Ali, M. A. Bourassa, Y. Zheng, G. J. Goni, G. R. Foltz, M. Rajeevan

Abstract

This study examines the benefit of using Ocean Mean Temperature (OMT) to aid in the prediction of the sign of Indian Summer Monsoon Rainfall (ISMR) anomalies. This is a statistical examination, rather than a process study. The thermal energy needed for maintaining and intensifying hurricanes and monsoons comes from the upper ocean, not just from the thin layer represented by sea surface temperature (SST) alone. Here, we show that the southwestern Indian OMT down to the depth of the 26 °C isotherm during January-March is a better qualitative predictor of the ISMR than SST. The success rate in predicting above- or below-average ISMR is 80% for OMT compared to 60% for SST. Other January-March mean climate indices (e.g., NINO3.4, Indian Ocean Dipole Mode Index, El Niño Southern Oscillation Modoki Index) have less predictability (52%, 48%, and 56%, respectively) than OMT percentage deviation (PD) (80%). Thus, OMT PD in the southwestern Indian Ocean provides a better qualitative prediction of ISMR by the end of March and indicates whether the ISMR will be above or below the climatological mean value.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 45 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 45 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 22%
Researcher 7 16%
Other 5 11%
Student > Master 4 9%
Student > Bachelor 3 7%
Other 4 9%
Unknown 12 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Earth and Planetary Sciences 23 51%
Physics and Astronomy 3 7%
Environmental Science 2 4%
Psychology 2 4%
Computer Science 1 2%
Other 3 7%
Unknown 11 24%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 15. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 22 September 2020.
All research outputs
#1,667,455
of 18,934,527 outputs
Outputs from Scientific Reports
#14,935
of 101,704 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#40,268
of 289,519 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Scientific Reports
#4
of 53 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 18,934,527 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 101,704 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 17.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 289,519 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 53 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.