MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1985856626 · doi:10.1029/2006gl026705

Impact of floods versus routing events on the thermohaline circulation

2006· article· en· W1985856626 on OpenAlexafffund
Katrin J. Meißner, Peter U. Clark

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysical Research Letters · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeology and Paleoclimatology Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsThermohaline circulationShutdown of thermohaline circulationYounger DryasAtlantic multidecadal oscillationClimatologyGeologyDeglaciationAbrupt climate changeNorthern HemisphereOceanographyClimate changeNorth Atlantic Deep WaterGlobal warmingHoloceneEffects of global warming

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The last deglaciation was interrupted by three major cooling events, the Younger Dryas, the Preboreal Oscillation and the 8.2‐ka cold event. As the Laurentide Ice Sheet retreated, different outlets from Lake Agassiz became available causing the proglacial lake to drain to a new level in a rather short timescale (flood) and divert continental runoff over hundreds of years (routing). Here we use an Earth System Model to investigate the impact of floods (short term, high amplitude) versus routing events (long term, low amplitude) on the thermohaline circulation and the resulting climate change. We show that the initial outbursts of freshwater are not strong enough to influence large‐scale climate and can therefore not be the cause of millennial‐scale climate variability. However, routing events have the potential of weakening the thermohaline circulation and therefore causing a cool event in the Northern Hemisphere.

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 score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.052

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.340
Teacher spread0.281 · 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

Citations58
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeophysical Research LettersSame topicGeology and Paleoclimatology ResearchFrench-language works237,207