Comparing and contrasting extreme stratospheric events, including their coupling to the tropospheric circulation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Recent work has emphasized the importance of stratosphere‐troposphere coupling associated with extreme values of the polar vortex strength and stratospheric planetary wave heat flux during Northern Hemisphere winter. Here using ERA‐Interim reanalysis data the evolution of the two types of events are compared. The life cycle of total (anomaly plus climatology) positive/negative heat flux events are associated with vertically deep high‐latitude planetary wave structures and exhibit largely equal but opposite‐signed impacts, including a net deceleration/acceleration of the polar vortex due to EP flux convergence/divergence and an equatorward/poleward tropospheric jet shift in the North Atlantic. The tropospheric wave pattern is westward propagating. High‐latitude stratospheric vertical zonal wind shear plays a key role during both events. A comparison of the stratospheric events reveals that planetary wave events contribute to the development of vortex events. In particular, total negative heat flux events precede strong vortex events showing that strong vortex events represent true dynamical events involving significant wave‐mean flow interaction. Coupling with the North Atlantic jet occurs preceding vortex events when wave‐1 dominates the total eddy heat flux in the lower stratosphere since interference with wave‐2 makes the impacts less clear. The tropospheric impacts in the North Atlantic associated with planetary wave events are found to be comparable if not larger than those following vortex events.
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 | 0.003 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".