MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2159901280 · doi:10.1175/jcli3359.1

Terrestrial Carbon Cycle Dynamics under Recent and Future Climate Change

2005· article· en· W2159901280 on OpenAlexafffund
H. Damon Matthews, Andrew J. Weaver, Katrin J. Meißner

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Climate · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAtmospheric and Environmental Gas Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Foundation for Climate and Atmospheric Sciences
KeywordsCarbon cycleEnvironmental scienceGreenhouse gasClimate changeCarbon sinkClimatologyClimate modelClimate commitmentAtmospheric sciencesClimate sensitivityRunaway climate changeVegetation (pathology)Global changeEarth system scienceGlobal warmingEffects of global warmingEcosystemGeologyOceanographyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The behavior of the terrestrial carbon cycle under historical and future climate change is examined using the University of Victoria Earth System Climate Model, now coupled to a dynamic terrestrial vegetation and global carbon cycle model. When forced by historical emissions of CO2 from fossil fuels and land-use change, the coupled climate–carbon cycle model accurately reproduces historical atmospheric CO2 trends, as well as terrestrial and oceanic uptake for the past two decades. Under six twenty-first-century CO2 emissions scenarios, both terrestrial and oceanic carbon sinks continue to increase, though terrestrial uptake slows in the latter half of the century. Climate–carbon cycle feedbacks are isolated by comparing a coupled model run with a run where climate and the carbon cycle are uncoupled. The modeled positive feedback between the carbon cycle and climate is found to be relatively small, resulting in an increase in simulated CO2 of 60 ppmv at the year 2100. Including non-CO2 greenhouse gas forcing and increasing the model’s climate sensitivity increase the effect of this feedback to 140 ppmv. The UVic model does not, however, simulate a switch from a terrestrial carbon sink to a source during the twenty-first century, as earlier studies have suggested. This can be explained by a lack of substantial reductions in simulated vegetation productivity due to climate changes.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.811
Threshold uncertainty score0.540

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.009
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.217 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations96
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of ClimateSame topicAtmospheric and Environmental Gas DynamicsFrench-language works237,207