MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1975252661 · doi:10.1175/jpo-d-14-0041.1

Role of Resolved and Parameterized Eddies in the Labrador Sea Balance of Heat and Buoyancy

2014· article· en· W1975252661 on OpenAlexaffabout
Oleg A. Saenko, Frédéric Dupont, Duo Yang, Paul G. Myers, Igor Yashayaev, G. C. Moore Smith

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Physical Oceanography · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicOceanographic and Atmospheric Processes
Canadian institutionsBedford Institute of OceanographyUniversity of AlbertaFisheries and Oceans CanadaEnvironment and Climate Change Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEddyGeologyBoundary currentBuoyancyClimatologyConvectionMesoscale meteorologyBarotropic fluidHeat fluxOceanographyOcean currentAtmospheric sciencesHeat transferMeteorologyMechanicsGeographyTurbulence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Deep convection in the Labrador Sea is an important component of the global ocean ventilation. The associated loss of heat to the atmosphere from the interior of the sea is thought to be mostly supplied by mesoscale eddies, generated either remotely or as a result of convection itself—processes that are not resolved by low-resolution ocean climate models. The authors first employ a high-resolution (°) ocean model forced with high-resolution (33 km, 3 h) atmospheric fields to further elaborate on the role of mesoscale eddies in maintaining the balance of heat and buoyancy in the Labrador Sea. In general agreement with previous studies, it is found that eddies remove heat along the coast and supply it to the interior. Some of the eddies that are generated because of the barotropic instability off the west coast of Greenland are recaptured by the boundary current. In the region of deep convection, the convergence of heat and buoyancy by eddies significantly increases with the deepening of the winter mixed layer. In addition, the vertical eddy flux plays an important part in the heat budget of the upper Labrador Sea, accounting for up to half of the heat loss to the atmosphere north of 60°N. A low-resolution (1°) model with parameterized eddies is then applied to show that it does capture, qualitatively, the general structure of eddy buoyancy advection along the Labrador Current. However, the 1° model is deficient in this regard in the most eddy active region off the west coast of Greenland, although some improvements can be made by forcing it with the high-resolution atmospheric fields.

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 score0.058
Threshold uncertainty score0.114

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.195
Teacher spread0.191 · 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

Citations23
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Physical OceanographySame topicOceanographic and Atmospheric ProcessesFrench-language works237,207