MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1615868986 · doi:10.1002/grl.50214

Irreversible mass loss of Canadian Arctic Archipelago glaciers

2013· article· en· W1615868986 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jan T. M. Lenaerts, J. H. van Angelen, M. R. van den Broeke, Alex Gardner, Bert Wouters, Erik van Meijgaard

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysical Research Letters · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicCryospheric studies and observations
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersSeventh Framework ProgrammeChinese Academy of Agricultural SciencesNational Collegiate Athletic Association
KeywordsMeltwaterGlacierGlacier mass balanceSnowArcticGlacier ice accumulationClimatologyTundraEnvironmental scienceCryosphereGeologyArchipelagoAtmospheric sciencesPhysical geographyIce streamSea iceGeomorphologyOceanographyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The Canadian Arctic Archipelago (CAA) contains the largest volume of glacier ice on Earth outside of Antarctica and Greenland. In the absence of significant calving, CAA glacier mass balance is governed by the difference between surface snow accumulation and meltwater runoff—surface mass balance. Here we use a coupled atmosphere/snow model to simulate present‐day and 21st century CAA glacier surface mass balance. Through comparison with Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment mass anomalies and in situ observations, we show that the model is capable of representing present‐day CAA glacier mass loss, as well as the dynamics of the seasonal snow cover on the CAA tundra. Next, we force this model until 2100 with a moderate climate warming scenario (AR5 RCP4.5). We show that enhanced meltwater runoff from CAA glaciers is not sufficiently compensated by increased snowfall. Extrapolation of these results toward an AR5 multimodel ensemble results in sustained 21st century CAA glacier mass loss in the vast majority (>99%) of the ~7000 temperature realizations.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.146
Threshold uncertainty score0.294

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.216 · 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

Citations129
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeophysical Research LettersSame topicCryospheric studies and observationsFrench-language works237,207