MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1973294409 · doi:10.1002/2014gl060212

A new health check of the ozone layer at global and regional scales

2014· article· en· W1973294409 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Melanie Coldewey‐Egbers, Diego Loyola, Peter Braesicke, M. Dameris, Michel Van Roozendaël, Christophe Lerot, Walter Zimmer

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysical Research Letters · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicAtmospheric Ozone and Climate
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersEuropean Organization for the Exploitation of Meteorological Satellites
KeywordsClimatologyOzone layerEnvironmental scienceMontreal ProtocolOzoneMiddle latitudesClimate changeMultivariate statisticsTerm (time)TropicsAtmospheric sciencesGeographyMeteorologyGeologyOceanographyStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In this study, we provide a new perspective on the current state of the ozone layer using a comprehensive long‐term total ozone data record which has been recently released within the framework of the European Space Agency's Climate Change Initiative. Based on a multivariate regression analysis, we disentangle various aspects of ozone change and variability on global and regional scales, thus enabling the monitoring of the effectiveness of the Montreal Protocol. Given dominant natural variability the expected midlatitude onset of ozone recovery is still not significant and would need additional 5 years of observations to be unequivocally detectable. A regional increase in the tropics is a likely manifestation of a long‐term change in El Niño–Southern Oscillation intensity over the last two decades induced by strong El Niño in 1997/1998 and strong La Niña in 2010/2011.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.043

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.263 · 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

Citations24
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeophysical Research Letters→Same topicAtmospheric Ozone and Climate→French-language works237,207→