Testing an ocean carbon model with observed sea surface pCO<sub>2</sub> and dissolved inorganic carbon in the tropical Pacific Ocean
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A basin‐scale carbon model for the tropical Pacific has been tested against in situ observations of CO2 partial pressure (pCO2) and dissolved inorganic carbon. Best agreement between model and observations occurs when gas exchange is enhanced at low wind speeds and when frictional smoothing as a parameterization of mesoscale eddy stirring/mixing is minimal. However, different realizations of the biological pump are not equally sensitive to the friction parameters, and it is not possible to completely isolate the effects of physics and biology. The model ocean shows substantial interannual variability in pCO2 and CO2 flux which is strongly correlated with the Multivariate ENSO Index. Interannual variability is similar to other models and suggests a relatively small role for the ocean in interannual variability of atmospheric CO2 growth. There are significant areas where CO2 remained supersaturated throughout the 1997–1998 El Niño and there was net outgassing from the “Wyrtki Box” at all times, but the net flux from the full model domain was near zero at the peak of the event. Testing the model against ship‐based observations produces a credible four‐dimensional field of the tropical ocean carbon system. Sampling this field with methods analogous to those used in empirical reconstructions of CO2 flux suggests that those methods can underestimate the interannual variability by up to a factor of ∼2.5 depending on the grid resolution used. Models and observations are not currently adequate to state with confidence that undersampled mesoscale variability does not affect the variability of the regional aggregate flux.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".