MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2017121670 · doi:10.1175/jcli3619.1

Dipole Anomaly in the Winter Arctic Atmosphere and Its Association with Sea Ice Motion

2006· article· en· W2017121670 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Climate · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicArctic and Antarctic ice dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAnomaly (physics)ClimatologyGeologyArchipelagoArctic oscillationSea iceArcticArctic dipole anomalyArctic ice packAtmosphere (unit)Arctic sea ice declineOceanographyDrift iceNorthern HemisphereGeographyMeteorology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This paper identified an atmospheric circulation anomaly–dipole structure anomaly in the Arctic atmosphere and its relationship with winter sea ice motion, based on the International Arctic Buoy Program (IABP) dataset (1979–98) and datasets from the National Centers for Environmental Prediction (NCEP) and the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) for the period 1960–2002. The dipole anomaly corresponds to the second-leading mode of EOF of monthly mean sea level pressure (SLP) north of 70°N during the winter season (October–March) and accounts for 13% of the variance. One of its two anomalous centers is stably occupied between the Kara Sea and Laptev Sea; the other is situated from the Canadian Archipelago through Greenland extending southeastward to the Nordic seas. The dipole anomaly differs from one described in other papers that can be attributed to an eastward shift of the center of action of the North Atlantic Oscillation. The finding shows that the dipole anomaly also differs from the “Barents Oscillation” revealed in a study by Skeie. Since the dipole anomaly shows a strong meridionality, it becomes an important mechanism to drive both anomalous sea ice exports out of the Arctic Basin and cold air outbreaks into the Barents Sea, the Nordic seas, and northern Europe. When the dipole anomaly remains in its positive phase, that is, negative SLP anomalies appear between the Kara Sea and the Laptev Sea with concurrent positive SLP over from the Canadian Archipelago extending southeastward to Greenland, there are large-scale changes in the intensity and character of sea ice transport in the Arctic basin. The significant changes include a weakening of the Beaufort gyre, an increase in sea ice export out of the Arctic basin through Fram Strait and the northern Barents Sea, and enhanced sea ice import from the Laptev Sea and the East Siberian Sea into the Arctic basin. Consequently, more sea ice appears in the Greenland and the Barents Seas during the positive phase of the dipole anomaly. During the negative phase of the dipole anomaly, SLP anomalies show an opposite scenario in the Arctic Ocean and its marginal seas when compared to the positive phase, with the center of negative SLP anomalies over the Nordic seas. Correspondingly, sea ice exports decrease from the Arctic basin flowing into the Nordic seas and the northern Barents Sea because of the strengthened Beaufort gyre. The finding indicates that influences of the dipole anomaly on winter sea ice motion are greater than that of the winter AO, particularly in the central Arctic basin and northward to Fram Strait, implying that effects of the dipole anomaly on sea ice export out of the Arctic basin become robust. The dipole anomaly is closely related to atmosphere–ice–ocean interactions that influence the Barents Sea sector.

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.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.144

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.191
Teacher spread0.187 · 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