MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2009048518 · doi:10.1029/1999gl010811

Match observations in the Arctic winter 1996/97: High stratospheric ozone loss rates correlate with low temperatures deep inside the polar vortex

2000· article· en· W2009048518 on OpenAlexaff
Astrid Schulz, Markus Rex, Johanna Steger, Neil Harris, Geir Braathen, E. Reimer, R. Alfier, Alexander Beck, M. Alpers, J. M. Cisneros, H. Claude, H. De Backer, H. Dier, V. Dorokhov, H. Fast, Georg Hansen, Hiroshi Kanzawa, B. Kois, Yasuyuki Kondo, E. Kosmidis, E. Kyrö, Z. Lityñska, M. J. Molyneux, G. Murphy, Hideaki Nakane, C. Parrondo, F. Ravegnani, Costas A. Varotsos, Catherine Vialle, P. Viatte, V. А. Yushkov, Christos Zerefos, Peter von der Gathen

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysical Research Letters · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicAtmospheric Ozone and Climate
Canadian institutionsEnvironment and Climate Change Canada
FundersBundesministerium für Bildung und ForschungEuropean Commission
KeywordsPolar vortexOzoneStratosphereVortexAtmospheric sciencesOzone layerOzone depletionEnvironmental scienceArcticClimatologyPolarMeteorologyGeologyOceanographyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With the Match technique, which is based on the coordinated release of ozonesondes, chemical ozone loss rates in the Arctic stratospheric vortex in early 1997 have been quantified in a vertical region between 400 K and 550 K. Ozone destruction was observed from mid February to mid March in most of these levels, with maximum loss rates between 25 and 45ppbv/day. The vortex averaged loss rates and the accumulated vertically integrated ozone loss have been smaller than in the previous two winters, indicating that the record low ozone columns observed in spring 1997 were partly caused by dynamical effects. The observed ozone loss is inhomogeneous through the vortex with the highest loss rates located in the vortex centre, coinciding with the lowest temperatures. Here the loss rates per sunlit hour reached 6 ppbv/h, while the corresponding vortex averaged rates did not exceed 3.9 ppbv/h.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.051
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.230 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations70
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeophysical Research LettersSame topicAtmospheric Ozone and ClimateFrench-language works237,207