Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Most previous global climate model simulations could only produce the termination of Snowball Earth episodes at CO2 partial pressures of several tenths of a bar, which is roughly an order of magnitude higher than recent estimates of CO2 levels during and shortly after Snowball events. These simulations have neglected the impact of dust aerosols on radiative transfer, which is an assumption of potentially grave importance. In this paper it is argued, using the Dust Entrainment and Deposition (DEAD) box model driven by GCM results, that atmospheric dust aerosol concentrations may have been one to two orders of magnitude higher during a Snowball Earth event than today. It is furthermore asserted on the basis of calculations using NCAR’s Single Column Atmospheric Model (SCAM)—a radiative–convective model with sophisticated aerosol, cloud, and radiative parameterizations—that when the surface albedo is high, such increases in dust aerosol loading can produce several times more surface warming than an increase in the partial pressure of CO2 from 10−4 to 10−1 bar. Therefore the conclusion is reached that including dust aerosols in simulations may reconcile the CO2 levels required for Snowball termination in climate models with observations.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".