MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2009990456 · doi:10.1029/2007eo520002

Toward a new generation of ice sheet models

2007· article· en· W2009990456 on OpenAlexaff
Christopher M. Little, Michael Oppenheimer, Richard B. Alley, V. Balaji, Garry K. C. Clarke, Thomas L. Delworth, Robert Hallberg, David M. Holland, Christina Hulbe, Stan Jacobs, Jesse V. Johnson, H. Levy, William H. Lipscomb, Shawn J. Marshall, B. R. Parizek, A. J. Payne, Gavin A. Schmidt, Ronald J. Stouffer, David G. Vaughan, Michael Winton

Bibliographic record

VenueEos · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicCryospheric studies and observations
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNational Oceanic and Atmospheric AdministrationPrinceton University
KeywordsIce sheetFuture sea levelClimatologyClimate changeEnvironmental scienceSea iceIce-sheet modelClimate modelGlobal warmingLead (geology)Greenland ice sheetAntarctic ice sheetSea level riseCryosphereIce streamGeologyOceanography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Large ice sheets, such as those presently covering Greenland and Antarctica, are important in driving changes of global climate and sea level. Yet numerical models developed to predict climate change and ice sheet‐driven sea level fluctuations have substantial limitations: Poorly represented physical processes in the ice sheet component likely lead to an underestimation of sea level rise forced by a warming climate. The resultant uncertainty in sea level projections, and the implications for climate policy, have been widely discussed since the publication of the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) [IPCC, 2007]. The assessment report notes that current models do not include “the full effects of changes in ice sheet flow, because a basis in published literature is lacking.” The report also notes that the understanding of rapid dynamical changes in ice flow “is too limited to assess their likelihood or provide a best estimate or an upper bound for sea level rise.”

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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 head0.103
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.142 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations39
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEosSame topicCryospheric studies and observationsFrench-language works237,207