MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2068991973 · doi:10.5194/acp-15-4215-2015

The decrease in mid-stratospheric tropical ozone since 1991

2015· article· en· W2068991973 on OpenAlexafffund
Gerald E. Nedoluha, D. E. Siskind, A. Lambert, C. D. Boone

Bibliographic record

VenueAtmospheric chemistry and physics · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicAtmospheric Ozone and Climate
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersU.S. Naval Research LaboratoryOffice of Naval ResearchGoddard Space Flight CenterNational Aeronautics and Space AdministrationCalifornia Institute of TechnologyJet Propulsion LaboratoryUniversity of Waterloo
KeywordsTropicsMicrowave Limb SounderAtmospheric sciencesUpwellingEnvironmental scienceOzoneOzone layerOccultationClimatologyStratosphereMeteorologyGeologyGeographyPhysicsOceanography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. While global stratospheric O3 has begun to recover, there are localized regions where O3 has decreased since 1991. Specifically, we use measurements from the Halogen Occultation Experiment (HALOE) for the period 1991–2005 and the NASA Aura Microwave Limb Sounder (MLS) for the period 2004–2013 to demonstrate a significant decrease in O3 near ~ 10 hPa in the tropics. O3 in this region is very sensitive to variations in NOy, and the observed decrease can be understood as a spatially localized, yet long-term increase in NOy. In turn, using data from MLS and from the Atmospheric Chemistry Experiment (ACE), we show that the NOy variations are caused by decreases in N2O which are likely linked to long-term variations in dynamics. To illustrate how variations in dynamics can affect N2O and O3, we show that by decreasing the upwelling in the tropics, more of the N2O can photodissociate with a concomitant increase in NOy production (via N2O + O(1D) → 2NO) at 10 hPa. Ultimately, this can cause an O3 decrease of the observed magnitude.

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 score0.422
Threshold uncertainty score0.606

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.199 · 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

Citations22
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAtmospheric chemistry and physicsSame topicAtmospheric Ozone and ClimateFrench-language works237,207