MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2062401828 · doi:10.1029/2008gl034250

Relative importance of dynamical and chemical contributions to Arctic wintertime ozone

2008· article· en· W2062401828 on OpenAlexaff
Susann Tegtmeier, Markus Rex, Ingo Wohltmann, Kirstin Krüger

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysical Research Letters · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicAtmospheric Ozone and Climate
Canadian institutionsEnvironment and Climate Change Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOzoneDiabaticPolar vortexAtmospheric sciencesChemical transport modelArcticEnvironmental scienceClimatologyOzone depletionOzone layerStratosphereVortexFlux (metallurgy)MeteorologyOceanographyGeologyChemistryPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present the first complete budget of the interannual variability in Arctic springtime ozone taking into account anthropogenic chemical and natural dynamical processes. For the winters 1991/1992 to 2003/2004 the Arctic chemical ozone loss is available from observations. This work investigates the dynamical supply of ozone to the Arctic polar vortex due to mean transport processes for the same winters. The ozone supply is quantified in a vortex‐averaged framework using estimates of diabatic descent over winter. We find that the interannual variability of both dynamical ozone supply and chemical ozone loss contribute, in equal shares, to the variability of the total ozone change. Moreover, together they explain nearly all of the interannual variability of Arctic springtime column ozone. Variability in planetary wave activity, characterized by the Eliassen‐Palm flux at 100 hPa, contributes significantly to the variability of ozone supply, chemical ozone loss and total springtime ozone.

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 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)0.000
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 score0.138
Threshold uncertainty score0.428

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.267 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations79
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeophysical Research LettersSame topicAtmospheric Ozone and ClimateFrench-language works237,207