Bibliographic record
Abstract
This winter, a record ozone loss was observed over the Arctic resulting in an unprecedented ozone hole that earned a large social attention. As chlorofluorocarbons continue to decline due to the Montreal protocol, random ozone destructions still occur in the polar region when the circumpolar flow above 20 km (“stratospheric polar vortex”) suddenly warms up and weakens. This unusual vortex event enhances downward intrusion of ozone-destroying chemical species from the upper atmosphere to the stratosphere. In this study, the behavior of polar ozone related to major sudden stratospheric warming events (SSW) was investigated. Specifically, air circulation and chemistry of ozone destroying species (NOx and CO) are examined during three realistic major SSWs and compared with a non- SSW winter. The simulated ozone during SSW showed anomalies in several regions. A “primary” ozone layer (near 40 km) experiences strong perturbation due to horizontal mixing. The “tertiary” maximum at 72 km displaces 5 km upward by intensified air movement above weakened vortex. The concentration of the “secondary” maximum (90- 110 km) increases by ~34% that appears to be related to the enhanced descent of nitrogen oxides and carbon monoxide. Unusual downwelling of ozone destroying species extends to the “primary” maximum and potentially can greatly contribute to the spring time ozone destruction. The observed anomalies demonstrate significant natural impact on ozone chemistry and dynamics that occur in conjunction with anthropogenic influence. This information can be used to predict the occurrence of ozone loss in the future and to validate NCAR (National Center for Atmospheric Research) model, widely used for atmospheric studies.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".