Modelling the atmospheric response to doubled CO<sub>2</sub> and depleted stratospheric ozone using a stratosphere‐resolving coupled GCM
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract We investigate the atmospheric response to doubled CO 2 and stratospheric ozone depletion in three versions of a general‐circulation model with differing vertical resolution and upper‐boundary heights. We find that an approximate doubling of the vertical resolution below 10 hPa reduces the temperature response to a doubling of CO 2 from 3.4 K to 2.5 K. Much of this difference is associated with changes in the cloud response. All model versions show an increase in the Arctic Oscillation index in response to a doubling of CO 2 , but the increase is no larger in the model with an upper boundary at 0.01 hPa than in the standard model with a top level at 5 hPa. All models also show general stratospheric cooling in response to doubling CO 2 . However, unlike some other authors, we find no cooling in the Arctic winter vortex below around 10 hPa in the stratosphere‐resolving model, and a weakening of the zonal winds throughout this region. This effect is due to enhanced upward propagation of planetary waves from the troposphere, and is an effect found only in the northern hemisphere, probably because of its larger zonal asymmetries. All models show a small but significant surface cooling in response to a reconstruction of 1998 stratospheric ozone depletion, and an increase in the Antarctic Oscillation index in the southern summer. The cooling extends through most of the atmosphere, and reaches a maximum in the region of the Antarctic ozone hole in November and December. © Royal Meteorological Society, 2003. K. D. Williams's contribution is Crown copyright.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".