Comparison of recent modeled and observed trends in total column ozone
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We present a comparison of trends in total column ozone from 10 two‐dimensional and 4 three‐dimensional models and solar backscatter ultraviolet–2 (SBUV/2) satellite observations from the period 1979–2003. Trends for the past (1979–2000), the recent 7 years (1996–2003), and the future (2000–2050) are compared. We have analyzed the data using both simple linear trends and linear trends derived with a hockey stick method including a turnaround point in 1996. If the last 7 years, 1996–2003, are analyzed in isolation, the SBUV/2 observations show no increase in ozone, and most of the models predict continued depletion, although at a lesser rate. In sharp contrast to this, the recent data show positive trends for the Northern and the Southern Hemispheres if the hockey stick method with a turnaround point in 1996 is employed for the models and observations. The analysis shows that the observed positive trends in both hemispheres in the recent 7‐year period are much larger than what is predicted by the models. The trends derived with the hockey stick method are very dependent on the values just before the turnaround point. The analysis of the recent data therefore depends greatly on these years being representative of the overall trend. Most models underestimate the past trends at middle and high latitudes. This is particularly pronounced in the Northern Hemisphere. Quantitatively, there is much disagreement among the models concerning future trends. However, the models agree that future trends are expected to be positive and less than half the magnitude of the past downward trends. Examination of the model projections shows that there is virtually no correlation between the past and future trends from the individual models.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".