MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1593331112 · doi:10.1029/2012gl052512

Evidence for El Niño–Southern Oscillation (ENSO) influence on Arctic CO interannual variability through biomass burning emissions

2012· article· en· W1593331112 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
S. A. Monks, S. R. Arnold, Martyn P. Chipperfield

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysical Research Letters · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAtmospheric and Environmental Gas Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Environment Research CouncilSight Research UK
KeywordsEnvironmental scienceBorealClimatologyBiomass burningArcticEl Niño Southern OscillationAtmospheric sciencesThe arcticBiomass (ecology)Arctic oscillationPrecipitationOceanographyMeteorologyGeographyNorthern HemisphereAerosolGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A global chemical transport model is used in conjunction with measurements from surface stations to study the importance of biomass burning and meteorology in driving Arctic carbon monoxide (CO) interannual variability (IAV). Simulations with yearly varying fire emissions capture 66%–93% of CO IAV and a simulation with yearly varying meteorology but fixed fire emissions captures 0–25%, showing that biomass burning variability is the dominant driver of surface CO IAV. Observed CO anomalies are found to be significantly correlated with El Niño (0.58 < r < 0.64, 99% confidence level (CL)) and results indicate that this is due to ENSO's influence on fire emissions. Boreal Alaska, Canada and north‐east Siberia are found to contribute 59% to total Arctic fire CO and 67% to Arctic fire CO IAV. Analysis of meteorological fire drivers in these regions suggests that ENSO affects winter/spring precipitation, driving the Arctic/ENSO relationship.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.401
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.356
Teacher spread0.299 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations57
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeophysical Research LettersSame topicAtmospheric and Environmental Gas DynamicsFrench-language works237,207