MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2015144391 · doi:10.1029/2003gl018722

Is there observational support for an El Niño‐like pattern of future global warming?

2004· article· en· W2015144391 on OpenAlexaff
G. J. Boer, Bin Yu, Sunyong Kim, Gregory M. Flato

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysical Research Letters · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeology and Paleoclimatology Research
Canadian institutionsCanadian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPaleoclimatologyClimatologyRadiative forcingForcing (mathematics)Greenhouse gasEnvironmental scienceAtmospheric sciencesRadiative transferClimate modelObservational studyGlobal warmingClimate changeGeologyOceanographyPhysicsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Three streams of evidence, namely simulations with coupled models, feedback analysis in the tropical Pacific, and observation‐based paleoclimate reconstructions, all support the expectation of a future mean El Niño‐like temperature response to the positive radiative forcing resulting from a continued increase in atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.075
GPT teacher head0.351
Teacher spread0.277 · 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
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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