MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2122629187 · doi:10.5194/acp-15-9965-2015

Past changes in the vertical distribution of ozone – Part 3: Analysis and interpretation of trends

2015· article· en· W2122629187 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueAtmospheric chemistry and physics · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicAtmospheric Ozone and Climate
Canadian institutionsUniversity of SaskatchewanUniversity of TorontoUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Environment Research CouncilMinistry of Business, Innovation and EmploymentAustralian Research CouncilSight Research UKJet Propulsion LaboratoryScheme for Promotion of Academic and Research CollaborationNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
KeywordsStratosphereAtmospheric sciencesClimatologyOzoneLatitudeEnvironmental scienceQuasi-biennial oscillationMiddle latitudesOzone depletionMeteorologyGeographyGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. Trends in the vertical distribution of ozone are reported and compared for a number of new and recently revised data sets. The amount of ozone-depleting compounds in the stratosphere (as measured by equivalent effective stratospheric chlorine – EESC) was maximised in the second half of the 1990s. We examine the periods before and after the peak to see if any change in trend is discernible in the ozone record that might be attributable to a change in the EESC trend, though no attribution is attempted. Prior to 1998, trends in the upper stratosphere (~ 45 km, 4 hPa) are found to be −5 to −10 % per decade at mid-latitudes and closer to −5 % per decade in the tropics. No trends are found in the mid-stratosphere (28 km, 30 hPa). Negative trends are seen in the lower stratosphere at mid-latitudes in both hemispheres and in the deep tropics. However, it is hard to be categorical about the trends in the lower stratosphere for three reasons: (i) there are fewer measurements, (ii) the data quality is poorer, and (iii) the measurements in the 1990s are perturbed by aerosols from the Mt Pinatubo eruption in 1991. These findings are similar to those reported previously even though the measurements for the main satellite and ground-based records have been revised. There is no sign of a continued negative trend in the upper stratosphere since 1998: instead there is a hint of an average positive trend of ~ 2 % per decade in mid-latitudes and ~ 3 % per decade in the tropics. The significance of these upward trends is investigated using different assumptions of the independence of the trend estimates found from different data sets. The averaged upward trends are significant if the trends derived from various data sets are assumed to be independent (as in Pawson et al., 2014) but are generally not significant if the trends are not independent. This occurs because many of the underlying measurement records are used in more than one merged data set. At this point it is not possible to say which assumption is best. Including an estimate of the drift of the overall ozone observing system decreases the significance of the trends. The significance will become clearer as (i) more years are added to the observational record, (ii) further improvements are made to the historic ozone record (e.g. through algorithm development), and (iii) the data merging techniques are refined, particularly through a more rigorous treatment of uncertainties.

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.

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 score0.343
Threshold uncertainty score0.209

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.207 · 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