## 4 Results
### Spatial Distribution of Eddies
Stricter screening rules were applied to filter the CWEs and ACEs: \(R^{2}>0.65\) with \(\sigma_{m}\geq 50\) m, \(a_{m}\geq 1.5\)\({}^{\circ}\)C for CWEs and \(a_{m}\leq-1.5\)\({}^{\circ}\)C for ACEs. Then, the surface location where the Argo profile is located is drawn based, on the region of the depth of the extreme point. Finally, the evolution of the geographical distribu  
Figure 11: Process of analysing the spatial distribution of TA profiles based on parameters from the MG model. Figure 10: Distribution of extreme point depth with maximum contribution to TA profiles for AEs (**a**) and CEs (**b**). The shaded areas in light green indicate the depth ranges of 60–80 m, 100–150 m, 300–400 m, and 500–600 m respectively. tion of the different eddy types and the distribution of the 'abnormal' eddy type are clearly illustrated by plotting the sea surface position of Argo in each 0.5\({}^{\circ}\) by 0.5\({}^{\circ}\) grid (CEs, CWEs in Figure 12 and AEs, ACEs in Figure 13). [PERSON]. et al. [35] have analysed the enhanced mesoscale eddy variability concentrated in two well-defined bands: one along the Kuroshio and its extension paths east and southeast of Japan, along \(\sim\)35\({}^{\circ}\)N, and the other centred on \(\sim\)22\({}^{\circ}\)N east of Taiwan, associated with the Subtropical Countercurrent (STCC). As can be seen in the figure, the spatial distribution at different depths of the extreme of the primary Gaussian func  
Figure 12: Geographical distribution of CE TA profiles from January 2002 to December 2021, with extreme points at different depth levels based on the MG model-fitting results in 0.5\({}^{\circ}\)\(\times\) 0.5\({}^{\circ}\). (**a–e**) shows the TA profiles with \(u\) at depth levels of 60–80 m, 100–150 m, 200–300 m, 300–400 m, and 500–600 m, respectively, while (**f**) shows the spatial distribution of CWEs. Figure 13: Geographical distribution of AE TA profiles with extreme points at different depth levels, based on the MG model-fitting results in 0.5\({}^{\circ}\)\(\times\) 0.5\({}^{\circ}\). (**a–e**) shows the TA profiles with \(u\) at depth levels of 60–80 m, 100–150 m, 200–300 m, 300–400 m, and 500–600 m, respectively, while (**f**) shows the spatial distribution of ACEs. regular variation and pattern.The eddies are relatively sparse, with shallow extreme points in TA profiles (in the depth range of 60-80 m). They have not yet formed concentrated belts, where the northern band is mainly located in the Subarctic Current (SAC) and north of the KE, including the mixed water region, while the southern band is located in the STCC and its southern coast. It is interesting to note that the distribution of eddies with temperature anomaly extremes in the 100-150 m range shows three bands, with an additional band along the North Equatorial Current (NEC) compared to eddies with depths in the 60-80 m range. With increasing depth, the eddy distribution returns to a two-band structure with increasing concentration, and the southern band moves southwards into the region between the STCC and the NEC. As the depth increases to 300-400 m, the northern distribution shifts to between the area of the Kuroshio Current (KC) part, north of 30\({}^{\circ}\)N, and the KE part, south of \(\sim\)35\({}^{\circ}\)N. It is noteworthy that the eddies with temperature anomaly extremes located between 500-600 m are clearly distributed in the region along the flow axis of the KE. The distribution of AEs is similar to that of CEs, but when the extreme depth of the maximum contribution function of CEs located at 200-300 m and 300-400 m, their northern zone position is more northward than that of CEs at the same depth. In other words, in range of 200-300 m, their distribution moves northward of the KC and KE, located between 35-40\({}^{\circ}\)N, while moving along \(\sim\)35\({}^{\circ}\)N for CEs. At 300-400 m, their main distribution has reached along the KE, while it is south of the KE for CEs.