MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2072000983 · doi:10.1002/2014pa002669

Large sensitivity to freshwater forcing location in 8.2 ka simulations

2014· article· en· W2072000983 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Carrie Morrill, E. M. Ward, A. J. Wagner, Bette L. Otto‐Bliesner, Nan Rosenbloom

Bibliographic record

VenuePaleoceanography · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeology and Paleoclimatology Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersOffice of Polar ProgramsNational Oceanic and Atmospheric AdministrationNational Center for Atmospheric ResearchNational Science Foundation
KeywordsOcean gyreForcing (mathematics)ClimatologyMeltwaterGeologyClimate modelOcean currentOceanographyMesoscale meteorologyGulf StreamSubtropicsClimate changeGlacial periodGeomorphology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The 8.2 ka event is a key test case for simulating the coupled climate response to changes in the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation (AMOC). Recent advances in quantifying freshwater fluxes at 8.2 ka from the proxy record have improved the realism of the forcing magnitude in model simulations, yet this forcing is still generally applied in an unrealistic geographic manner, across most of the Labrador Sea rather than just along the Labrador coast. Previous simulations with eddy‐ resolving ocean models have come to conflicting conclusions regarding the ability of such a coastally confined flow to impact the AMOC. These simulations have also not incorporated full atmosphere models nor have they used the new meltwater forcing values for 8.2 ka. We use the Community Climate System Model, version 3, with an ocean model resolution only slightly coarser than that used in previous eddy‐resolving simulations, to test the sensitivity to freshwater forcing location. When revised freshwater forcing is applied across the Labrador Sea, the AMOC is reduced by ~40% and climate anomalies compare well with proxy records of the 8.2 ka event in terms of magnitude and duration. When the forcing is added just along the Labrador coast, however, most meltwater joins the subtropical gyre and travels to the subtropics with minor impact to the AMOC (~10% decrease). It is likely that model biases in the placement of the North Atlantic Current remain an important limitation for correctly simulating the 8.2 ka event.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.042
Threshold uncertainty score0.083

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.229 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations34
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePaleoceanographySame topicGeology and Paleoclimatology ResearchFrench-language works237,207