MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2123783096 · doi:10.1175/2008jas2770.1

Sudden Stratospheric Warmings as Noise-Induced Transitions

2008· article· en· W2123783096 on OpenAlexafffund
Thomas Birner, Paul D. Williams

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Atmospheric Sciences · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicClimate variability and models
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Environment Research CouncilSight Research UKCanadian Foundation for Climate and Atmospheric Sciences
KeywordsForcing (mathematics)PhysicsMomentum (technical analysis)Probability density functionStatistical physicsVortexStationary stateNoise (video)Atmospheric sciencesMeteorologyMathematicsQuantum mechanicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sudden stratospheric warmings (SSWs) are usually considered to be initiated by planetary wave activity. Here it is asked whether small-scale variability (e.g., related to gravity waves) can lead to SSWs given a certain amount of planetary wave activity that is by itself not sufficient to cause a SSW. A highly vertically truncated version of the Holton–Mass model of stratospheric wave–mean flow interaction, recently proposed by Ruzmaikin et al., is extended to include stochastic forcing. In the deterministic setting, this low-order model exhibits multiple stable equilibria corresponding to the undisturbed vortex and SSW state, respectively. Momentum forcing due to quasi-random gravity wave activity is introduced as an additive noise term in the zonal momentum equation. Two distinct approaches are pursued to study the stochastic system. First, the system, initialized at the undisturbed state, is numerically integrated many times to derive statistics of first passage times of the system undergoing a transition to the SSW state. Second, the Fokker–Planck equation corresponding to the stochastic system is solved numerically to derive the stationary probability density function of the system. Both approaches show that even small to moderate strengths of the stochastic gravity wave forcing can be sufficient to cause a SSW for cases for which the deterministic system would not have predicted a SSW.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.490
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.222 · 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.

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

Citations38
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Atmospheric SciencesSame topicClimate variability and modelsFrench-language works237,207