Middepth spreading in the subpolar North Atlantic Ocean: Reconciling CFC‐11 and float observations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) enter the middepth layers of the North Atlantic Ocean from the atmosphere during the formation of dense mode water in the Labrador and Irminger Seas of the subpolar gyre. The CFC‐bearing waters then spread from the convection regions through advection and diffusion of the water masses. Using recent estimates of the circulation at 1500 m depth from subsurface profiling floats the spreading of CFC‐11 is simulated in the subpolar North Atlantic with an advective‐diffusive model. Several numerical experiments are performed with different stream functions, lateral diffusivities and variations in the CFC‐11 sources. The results are then compared to the observed CFC‐11 field during 1996–1998. Poor fits are found for diffusivities less than about 500 m2 s−1. Better fits are found for diffusivities ranging from 500–12,000 m2 s−1, although unrealistically smooth model solutions are produced if the diffusivity exceeds about 3000 m2 s−1. Simulations that include both Labrador and Irminger Sea CFC‐11 sources fit the data better than with Labrador sources alone. None of the model CFC solutions fit the data within the CFC uncertainty over the whole domain; the model performs well in the western part of the subpolar gyre, but CFC‐11 concentrations are consistently too low in the West European Basin. It is possible that uncertainty in the float‐based circulation can account for these misfits, and a more accurate circulation estimate might be able to fit the observed CFC‐11 field. Alternatively, time variations in the flow or deep water formation processes, which clearly exist in the real ocean, may need to be included.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".