MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2064872575 · doi:10.1029/2005gl023213

The relationship between the 0°C isotherm and atmospheric forcing in the Arctic Ocean

2005· article· en· W2064872575 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Sookmi Moon, Mark A. Johnson

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysical Research Letters · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicArctic and Antarctic ice dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEmpirical orthogonal functionsClimatologyNorth Atlantic oscillationArchipelagoForcing (mathematics)ArcticEnvironmental scienceMixed layerArctic oscillationMode (computer interface)Arctic dipole anomalyThe arcticAtmospheric sciencesGeologyOceanographyNorthern HemisphereSea iceArctic ice pack

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Empirical Orthogonal Function (EOF) analysis was performed on the gridded data of the depth to the 0°C isotherm to better understand Atlantic layer variability in the Arctic Ocean. The first mode accounts for 51% of the total variance. The second mode accounts for 26% of the variance, and shows high variability in the region of inflow from the Barents Sea, and large but oppositely signed variability in the region near the Canadian Archipelago and along the path of the Transpolar Drift. This second mode is correlated with the Arctic Oscillation (AO) and North Atlantic Oscillation (NAO) indices. Composite analyses of the data using the AO and NAO indices to partition the data reinforces the physical relationship between the second EOF and atmospheric forcing. This study shows that the variability of the Atlantic Layer characterized by the 0°C isotherm across the Arctic Ocean is significantly correlated with atmospheric driving.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.045

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.247 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations4
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeophysical Research Letters→Same topicArctic and Antarctic ice dynamics→French-language works237,207→