MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1527314635

Simulations of the Arctic Boundary Current in an eddy-resolving global ocean model

2012· article· en· W1527314635 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Yevgeny Aksenov, A. J. George Nurser, Sheldon Bacon, Andrew C. Coward

Bibliographic record

VenueEGUGA · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicArctic and Antarctic ice dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBoundary currentArcticCurrent (fluid)OceanographyGeologyClimatologyThe arcticCircumpolar starOcean currentSea ice
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Arctic Ocean is shielded from winds by sea ice and is strongly stratified, resulting in extremely low mixing rates. In this quiescent ocean, currents along the continental shelves become the principal dynamical features of the circulation. Observations and model results suggest the existence of a fast oceanic current in the Arctic Ocean, the Arctic Circumpolar Boundary Current (ACBC). The current flows counterclockwise (cyclonically) along the shelf break of the Siberian, Alaskan and Canadian Arctic shelves all way around the Arctic Ocean margins, leaving through western Fram Strait, and taking about two decades to complete the circuit (Aksenov et al., 2011). Simulations with an eddy-resolving global 1/12 degree NEMO model show that the ACBC consists of several jets with the fastest flow occurring at the shelf break. We compare the models results with observations and examine mechanisms driving the ACBC. Through the analysis of the NEMO simulations performed with eddy-resolving, eddy-permitting and non-eddying model configurations we investigate the effect of resolution on the current.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.048
Threshold uncertainty score0.096

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.239 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEGUGASame topicArctic and Antarctic ice dynamicsFrench-language works237,207