MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1574959524 · doi:10.1029/2008gb003421

Using tracer observations to reduce the uncertainty of ocean diapycnal mixing and climate–carbon cycle projections

2009· article· en· W1574959524 on OpenAlexaff
Andreas Schmittner, Nathan M. Urban, Klaus Keller, H. Damon Matthews

Bibliographic record

VenueGlobal Biogeochemical Cycles · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAtmospheric and Environmental Gas Dynamics
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnvironmental scienceMixing (physics)TRACERCarbon cycleGreenhouse gasAtmospheric sciencesClimatologyClimate modelClimate changeOcean currentGeologyOceanographyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

What is the uncertainty of climate–carbon cycle projections in response to anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions, and how can we reduce this uncertainty? We address this question by quantifying the ability of available ocean tracer observations to constrain the values of diapycnal diffusivity in the pelagic ocean (Kv), a key uncertain parameter representing sub‐grid‐scale diapycnal (vertical) mixing in physical circulation models. We show that model versions with weak mixing (i.e., low Kv) lead to higher projections of atmospheric CO2 and larger global warming than do models with vigorous mixing. Slower heat uptake and slower carbon uptake by the oceans contribute about equally to the accelerated warming in the low‐mixing models. A Bayesian data‐model fusion method is developed to quantify the likelihood of different structural and parametric model choices given an array of observed 20th century ocean tracer distributions. These spatially resolved observations provide strong limits on the upper value of Kv, whereas global metrics used in previous studies, such as the historical evolution of global average surface air temperature, global ocean heat uptake, or atmospheric CO2 concentration, provide only poor constraints. We compare different methods to quantify the probability of a particular diffusivity value given the observational constraints. One‐dimensional, globally horizontally averaged data result in sharper probability density functions compared with the full 3‐D fields. This perhaps unexpected result opens up an avenue to objectively determine the optimal degree of aggregation at which model predictions have skill, and at which observations are most helpful in constraining model parameters. Our best estimate for Kv in the pelagic pycnocline is around 0.05–0.2 cm2/s, in agreement with earlier independent estimates based on tracer dispersion experiments and turbulence microstructure measurements.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.237 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations45
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGlobal Biogeochemical CyclesSame topicAtmospheric and Environmental Gas DynamicsFrench-language works237,207