MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2002180428 · doi:10.1029/2006gl028389

Influence of atmospheric transport on the inter‐annual variation of the CO<sub>2</sub> seasonal cycle downward zero‐crossing

2007· article· en· W2002180428 on OpenAlexaff
Shohei Murayama, Kaz Higuchi, Shoichi Taguchi

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysical Research Letters · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAtmospheric and Environmental Gas Dynamics
Canadian institutionsEnvironment and Climate Change Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnvironmental scienceNorthern HemisphereClimatologyAtmospheric sciencesSeasonalityLatitudeSouthern HemisphereAtmospheric circulationChemical transport modelAnnual cycleFlux (metallurgy)Proxy (statistics)TroposphereGeographyGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Using a 3‐dimensional atmospheric transport model driven by the ECMWF winds and the non‐interannually varying seasonal biospheric flux from the CASA global ecosystem model, we show that a significant change in the downward‐zero crossing day (DZCD) of the atmospheric CO2 seasonal cycle in the Northern Hemisphere above 30°N latitude can be obtained by year‐to‐year changes in the atmospheric transport alone. The transport model is able to reproduce both the trend and standard deviation of DZCD observed at Pt. Barrow. With only atmospheric transport changing from year to year, eastern North Atlantic, Europe, southern Eurasia, southeastern United States and western North America show DZCD starting earlier by 5–10 days after 21 years of model integration. If DZCD obtained from CO2 monitoring stations is going to be used as a proxy for determining the growing season length, then it is important to take into account of that portion caused by the atmospheric transport.

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 score0.048
Threshold uncertainty score0.095

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.239 · 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

Citations9
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeophysical Research Letters→Same topicAtmospheric and Environmental Gas Dynamics→French-language works237,207→