MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2508423253 · doi:10.3189/2014jog13j202

Role of model initialization for projections of 21st-century Greenland ice sheet mass loss

2014· article· en· W2508423253 on OpenAlexaff
Guðfinna Ađalgeirsdóttir, Andy Aschwanden, C. Khroulev, Fredrik Boberg, Ruth Mottram, Philippe Lucas‐Picher, Jens Hesselbjerg Christensen

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Glaciology · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicCryospheric studies and observations
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
FundersDanish Agency for Science and Higher EducationUniversity of BristolForsknings- og InnovationsstyrelsenEuropean CommissionNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
KeywordsGreenland ice sheetHadCM3Ice-sheet modelInitializationIce sheetClimatologyFuture sea levelGeologyForcing (mathematics)Climate modelSea iceIce streamClimate changeCryosphereGeneral Circulation ModelOceanography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Model simulations of the Greenland ice sheet contribution to 21st-century sea-level rise are performed with a state-of-the-art ice-sheet model (Parallel Ice Sheet Model (PISM)). The climate-forcing fields are obtained from the European Union’s Seventh Framework Programme project ice2sea, in which three regional climate models are used to dynamically downscale two scenarios (A1B and E1) from two general circulation models (ECHAM5 and HadCM3). To assess the sensitivity of the projections to the model initial state, four initialization methods are applied. In these experiments, the simulated contribution to sea-level rise by 2100 ranges from an equivalent of 0.2 to 6.8 cm. The largest uncertainties arise from different formulations of the regional climate models (0.8–3.9 cm) and applied scenarios (0.65–1.9 cm), but an important source of uncertainty is the initialization method (0.1–0.8 cm). These model simulations do not account for the recently observed acceleration of ice streams and consequent thinning rates, the changing ice discharge that may result from the spatial and temporal variability of ocean forcing, or the feedback occurring between ice-sheet elevation changes and climate forcing. Thus the results should be considered the lower limit of Greenland ice sheet contributions to sea-level rise, until such processes have been integrated into large-scale ice-sheet models.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.203
Threshold uncertainty score0.168

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.223 · 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

Citations46
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of GlaciologySame topicCryospheric studies and observationsFrench-language works237,207