Variability in summer anticyclonic circulation over the Canadian Arctic Archipelago and west Greenland in the late 20th/early 21st centuries and its effect on glacier mass balance
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT More frequent summer anticyclonic circulation over the Canadian Arctic Archipelago (CAA) between 2007 and 2012 caused more intense and sustained melt of ice caps and glaciers and increased rates of mass loss. To determine the frequency of the occurrence of anticyclonic circulation over the CAA and western Greenland, a self‐organizing map (SOM) was used to classify daily 500 hPa geopotential height (GPH) anomalies calculated from National Centers for Environmental Prediction and the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCEP/NCAR) Reanalysis 1 (1948–2012) and five Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 5 (CMIP5) models (1950–2025). While the NCEP/NCAR reanalysis indicates that significant summer warming over the CAA is linked to a doubling in the frequency of anticyclonic circulation over the region since 2007, the CMIP5 models were not capable of reproducing the magnitude of the trend in the frequency of anticyclonic circulation over the CAA and western Greenland found in NCEP/NCAR. The variability of the frequency of positive anomalies in summer 500 hPa GPH was found to be related to variability of Arctic sea ice volume/thickness in April, May and June (1979–2012) and to poleward eddy heat flux in June (1979–2012).
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".