The control of the Southern Hemisphere Westerlies on the position of the Subtropical Front
Bibliographic record
Abstract
[1] In recent years the latitudinal position of the Subtropical Front (STF) has emerged as a key parameter in the global climate. A poleward positioned front is thought to allow a greater salt flux from the Indian to the Atlantic Ocean and so drive a stronger Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation. Here the common view that the STF aligns with the zero wind stress curl (WSC) is challenged. Based on the STF climatologies of Orsi et al. (1995), Belkin and Gordon (1996), Graham and De Boer (2013), and on satellite scatterometry winds, we find that the zero WSC contour lies on average ∼10°, ∼8°, and ∼5° poleward of the front for the three climatologies, respectively. The circulation in the region between the Subtropical Gyres and the zero WSC contour is not forced by the WSC but rather by the strong bottom pressure torque that is a result of the interaction of the Antarctic Circumpolar Current with the ocean floor topography. The actual control of the position of the STF is crucially dependent on whether the front is regarded as simply a surface water mass boundary or a dynamical front. For the Agulhas Leakage problem, the southern boundary of the so-called Super Gyre may be the most relevant property but this cannot easily be identified in 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 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".