MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2081287593 · doi:10.1029/2000gl012602

The 8.2 kyr BP event simulated by a Global Atmosphere—Sea‐Ice—Ocean Model

2001· article· en· W2081287593 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
H. Renssen, Hugues Goosse, Thierry Fichefet, Jean‐Michel Campin

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysical Research Letters · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeology and Paleoclimatology Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsThermohaline circulationMeltwaterGeologyClimatologyOceanographyShutdown of thermohaline circulationAtmosphere (unit)Sea iceOcean currentNorth Atlantic Deep WaterEnvironmental scienceGlacial periodMeteorologyGeomorphologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Seven freshwater perturbation experiments were performed with a global atmosphere—sea‐ice—ocean model to study the mechanism behind the 8.2 kyr BP Holocene cooling event. These experiments differed in initial state and duration of the applied freshwater pulse, while the amount of freshwater was kept constant (4.67 × 1014 m³). One of the scenarios, with freshwater added to the Labrador Sea at a rate of 0.75 Sv during 20 years, resulted in weakening of the North Atlantic thermohaline circulation during 320 years and surface cooling varying from 1 to 5°C over adjacent continents. This result is consistent with proxy data, suggesting that a meltwater‐induced weakening of the thermohaline circulation caused the event. Moreover, our results indicate that the time‐scale of the meltwater release and the initial state are important, as both have a strong effect on the magnitude and duration of the produced model response.

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)0.001
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 score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.281 · 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

Citations207
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeophysical Research LettersSame topicGeology and Paleoclimatology ResearchFrench-language works237,207