MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1978626005 · doi:10.1175/2009jcli3053.1

The Seasonal Atmospheric Response to Projected Arctic Sea Ice Loss in the Late Twenty-First Century

2009· article· en· W1978626005 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Clara Deser, Robert A. Tomas, Michael A. Alexander, David M. Lawrence

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Climate · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicArctic and Antarctic ice dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClimatologySea iceArctic ice packEnvironmental scienceArctic sea ice declineArcticAtmospheric circulationSnowForcing (mathematics)PrecipitationCryosphereIce-albedo feedbackLatitudeDrift iceAtmospheric sciencesGeologyOceanographyMeteorologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The authors investigate the atmospheric response to projected Arctic sea ice loss at the end of the twenty-first century using an atmospheric general circulation model (GCM) coupled to a land surface model. The response was obtained from two 60-yr integrations: one with a repeating seasonal cycle of specified sea ice conditions for the late twentieth century (1980–99) and one with that of sea ice conditions for the late twenty-first century (2080–99). In both integrations, a repeating seasonal cycle of SSTs for 1980–99 was prescribed to isolate the impact of projected future sea ice loss. Note that greenhouse gas concentrations remained fixed at 1980–99 levels in both sets of experiments. The twentieth- and twenty-first-century sea ice (and SST) conditions were obtained from ensemble mean integrations of a coupled GCM under historical forcing and Special Report on Emissions Scenarios (SRES) A1B scenario forcing, respectively. The loss of Arctic sea ice is greatest in summer and fall, yet the response of the net surface energy budget over the Arctic Ocean is largest in winter. Air temperature and precipitation responses also maximize in winter, both over the Arctic Ocean and over the adjacent high-latitude continents. Snow depths increase over Siberia and northern Canada because of the enhanced winter precipitation. Atmospheric warming over the high-latitude continents is mainly confined to the boundary layer (below ∼850 hPa) and to regions with a strong low-level temperature inversion. Enhanced warm air advection by submonthly transient motions is the primary mechanism for the terrestrial warming. A significant large-scale atmospheric circulation response is found during winter, with a baroclinic (equivalent barotropic) vertical structure over the Arctic in November–December (January–March). This response resembles the negative phase of the North Atlantic Oscillation in February only. Comparison with the fully coupled model reveals that Arctic sea ice loss accounts for most of the seasonal, spatial, and vertical structure of the high-latitude warming response to greenhouse gas forcing at the end of the twenty-first century.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.042

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.220 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations549
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of ClimateSame topicArctic and Antarctic ice dynamicsFrench-language works237,207