On the Connection between Dense Water Formation, Overturning, and Poleward Heat Transport in a Convective Basin*
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract An isopycnal, two-layer, idealized model for a convective basin is proposed, consisting of a convecting, interior region and a surrounding boundary current (buoyancy and wind-driven). Parameterized eddy fluxes govern the exchange between the two. To balance the interior buoyancy loss, the boundary current becomes denser as it flows around the basin. Geostrophy imposes that this densification be accompanied by sinking in the boundary current and hence by an overturning circulation. The poleward heat transport, associated with convection in the basin, can thus be viewed as a result of both an overturning and a horizontal circulation. When adapted to the Labrador Sea, the model is able to reproduce the bulk features of the mean state, the seasonal cycle, and even the shutdown of convection from 1969 to 1972. According to the model, only 40% of the poleward heat (buoyancy) transport of the Labrador Sea is associated with the overturning circulation. An exact solution is presented for the linearized equations when changes in the boundary current are small. Numerical solutions are calculated for variations in the amount of convection and for changes in the remotely forced circulation around the basin. These results highlight how the overturning circulation is not simply related to the amount of dense water formed. A speeding up of the circulation around the basin due to wind forcing, for example, will decrease the intensity of the overturning circulation while the dense water formation remains unvaried. In general, it is shown that the fraction of poleward buoyancy (or heat) transport carried by the overturning circulation is not an intrinsic property of the basin but can vary as a result of a number of factors.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".