Ice-sheet configuration in the CMIP5/PMIP3 Last Glacial Maximum experiments
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. We describe the creation of a data set describing changes related to the presence of ice sheets, including ice-sheet extent and height, ice-shelf extent, and the distribution and elevation of ice-free land at the Last Glacial Maximum (LGM), which were used in LGM experiments conducted as part of the fifth phase of the Coupled Modelling Intercomparison Project (CMIP5) and the third phase of the Palaeoclimate Modelling Intercomparison Project (PMIP3). The CMIP5/PMIP3 data sets were created from reconstructions made by three different groups, which were all obtained using a model-inversion approach but differ in the assumptions used in the modelling and in the type of data used as constraints. The ice-sheet extent in the Northern Hemisphere (NH) does not vary substantially between the three individual data sources. The difference in the topography of the NH ice sheets is also moderate, and smaller than the differences between these reconstructions (and the resultant composite reconstruction) and ice-sheet reconstructions used in previous generations of PMIP. Only two of the individual reconstructions provide information for Antarctica. The discrepancy between these two reconstructions is larger than the difference for the NH ice sheets, although still less than the difference between the composite reconstruction and previous PMIP ice-sheet reconstructions. Although largely confined to the ice-covered regions, differences between the climate response to the individual LGM reconstructions extend over the North Atlantic Ocean and Northern Hemisphere continents, partly through atmospheric stationary waves. Differences between the climate response to the CMIP5/PMIP3 composite and any individual ice-sheet reconstruction are smaller than those between the CMIP5/PMIP3 composite and the ice sheet used in the last phase of PMIP (PMIP2).
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 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".