The Influence of the Basic State on the Northern Hemisphere Circulation Response to Climate Change
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Employing a comprehensive atmospheric general circulation model, the authors have shown in a previous study that the time-mean Northern Hemisphere (NH) winter circulation response to a CO2 doubling perturbation depends significantly on parameterized orographic gravity wave drag (OGWD) parameter settings, which are essentially related to the strength of OGWD. A possible implication is that aspects of the greenhouse gas–induced circulation response could depend directly on the formulation and internal parameters settings of the OGWD scheme. Such a result would further heighten the importance of OGWD parameterizations for climate studies and have far-reaching implications for modeled projections of future climate change. In this study the causal relationship between OGWD and changes in time-mean NH wintertime circulation response to CO2 doubling is investigated. This is accomplished by introducing a methodology that allows one to hold the OGWD forcing fixed to its 1 × CO2 value when CO2 is doubled. Employing this methodology for perturbation experiments with different strengths of OGWD, the authors find that the changes in OGWD forcing due to CO2 doubling have essentially no impact on the time-mean zonal-mean zonal wind response. The primary conclusion is that the OGWD influence is limited to its impact on the 1 × CO2 basic-state climatology, which defines the propagation characteristics of resolved waves. Different strengths of OGWD result in control basic states with different refractive properties for the resolved waves. It is shown that the action of resolved waves, as well as their sensitivity to such differences in the control climatology, explains essentially all of the NH wintertime circulation sensitivity identified here and in a previous study. Implications for climate change projections and climate-model development are discussed.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".