MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2349931164

Changes in Atlantic Thermohaline Circulation under Different Atmospheric CO_2 Scenarios

2007· article· en· W2349931164 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Lin Mu

Bibliographic record

VenueEarth Science(Journal of China University of Geosciences) · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicArctic and Antarctic ice dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsThermohaline circulationNorth Atlantic Deep WaterOceanographyShutdown of thermohaline circulationClimatologyEnvironmental scienceClimate changeGeology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Changes in the thermohaline circulation (THC) arising from the increase in the CO_2 concentration in the atmosphere will dominate the future climate regimes. In this paper, a new climate model developed at Max-Planck Institute for Meteorology is targeted at the variation of THC strength, the changes in North Atlantic deep water (NADW) formation and the regional responses of the THC in the North Atlantic to the increasing atmospheric CO_2. From 2000 to 2100, the increase in CO_2 (B1, A1B and A2) will have decreased the strength of THC by 4Sv, 5.1Sv and 5.2Sv, respectively, or equivalently , reduced by 20%, 25% and 25.1% of the present THC strength. This research indicates that oceanic deep convective activity is significantly strengthened in the Greenland-Iceland-Norway (GIN) Seas owing to saltier (denser) upper oceans , but is weakened both in the Labrador Sea and in the south of the Denmark Strait region (SDSR) because of surface warming and freshening derived from global warming. The saltiness of the GIN Seas is mainly initiated by the increase in the saline North Atlantic inflow through Faro-Bank (FB) Channel. Under the scenario A1B, the deep water formation rate in the North Atlantic decreases from 16.2Sv to 12.9Sv with a corresponding increase in CO_2.

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)0.002
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.926

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.189
Teacher spread0.181 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEarth Science(Journal of China University of Geosciences)Same topicArctic and Antarctic ice dynamicsFrench-language works237,207