Simulated Anthropogenic Changes in the Brewer–Dobson Circulation, Including Its Extension to High Latitudes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Recent studies using comprehensive middle atmosphere models predict a strengthening of the Brewer–Dobson circulation in response to climate change. To gain confidence in the realism of this result it is important to quantify and understand the contributions from the different components of stratospheric wave drag that cause this increase. Such an analysis is performed here using three 150-yr transient simulations from the Canadian Middle Atmosphere Model (CMAM), a Chemistry–Climate Model that simulates climate change and ozone depletion and recovery. Resolved wave drag and parameterized orographic gravity wave drag account for 60% and 40%, respectively, of the long-term trend in annual mean net upward mass flux at 70 hPa, with planetary waves accounting for 60% of the resolved wave drag trend. Synoptic wave drag has the strongest impact in northern winter, where it accounts for nearly as much of the upward mass flux trend as planetary wave drag. Owing to differences in the latitudinal structure of the wave drag changes, the relative contribution of resolved and parameterized wave drag to the tropical upward mass flux trend over any particular latitude range is highly sensitive to the range of latitudes considered. An examination of the spatial structure of the climate change response reveals no straightforward connection between the low-latitude and high-latitude changes: while the model results show an increase in Arctic downwelling in winter, they also show a decrease in Antarctic downwelling in spring. Both changes are attributed to changes in the flux of stationary planetary wave activity into the stratosphere.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".