MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Ocean ventilation as a driver of interannual variability in atmospheric potential oxygen

2008· article· en· W2159982266 on OpenAlexaff
Roberta C. Hamme, Ralph F. Keeling

Bibliographic record

VenueTellus B · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicMarine and coastal ecosystems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDrawdown (hydrology)Environmental scienceClimatologySouthern HemisphereOceanographyAtmospheric sciencesNorthern HemisphereBiosphereGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present observations of interannual variability on 2–5 yr timescales in atmospheric potential oxygen (APO≈O2+CO2) from the Scripps Institution of Oceanography global flask sampling network. Interannual variations in the tracer APO are expected to arise from air–sea fluxes alone, because APO is insensitive to exchanges with the terrestrial biosphere. These interannual variations are shown to be regionally coherent and robust to analytical artefacts. We focus on explaining a feature dominant in records from the Northern Hemisphere stations, marked by increasing APO in the late 1990s, followed by an abrupt drawdown in 2000–2001. The timing of the drawdown matches a renewal of deep convection in the North Atlantic, followed the next year by a severe winter in the western North Pacific that may have allowed ventilation of denser isopycnals than usual. We find a weak correlation between changes in the interhemispheric APO difference and El Ni˜no indices, and the observations show no strong features of the 1997–98 El Ni˜no. Comparisons with estimates of variations in ocean productivity and ocean heat content demonstrate that these processes are secondary influences at these timescales. We conclude that the evidence points to variability in ocean ventilation as the main driver of interannual variability in APO.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.180
Teacher spread0.174 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations32
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTellus BSame topicMarine and coastal ecosystemsFrench-language works237,207