MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2886003933 · doi:10.1175/jcli-d-18-0241.1

Impacts of Atmospheric Reanalysis Uncertainty on Atlantic Overturning Estimates at 25°N

2018· article· en· W2886003933 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Helen Pillar, H. L. Johnson, David P. Marshall, Patrick Heimbach, So Takao

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Climate · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicClimate variability and models
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Oceanic and Atmospheric AdministrationNatural Environment Research CouncilSight Research UKNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
KeywordsClimatologyEnvironmental scienceAnomaly (physics)Climate modelThermohaline circulationFlux (metallurgy)Atmospheric sciencesClimate changeGeologyOceanographyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Atmospheric reanalyses are commonly used to force numerical ocean models, but despite large discrepancies reported between different products, the impact of reanalysis uncertainty on the simulated ocean state is rarely assessed. In this study, the impact of uncertainty in surface fluxes of buoyancy and momentum on the modeled Atlantic meridional overturning at 25°N is quantified for the period January 1994–December 2011. By using an ocean-only climate model and its adjoint, the space and time origins of overturning uncertainty resulting from air–sea flux uncertainty are fully explored. Uncertainty in overturning induced by prior air–sea flux uncertainty can exceed 4 Sv (where 1 Sv ≡ 106 m3 s−1) within 15 yr, at times exceeding the amplitude of the ensemble-mean overturning anomaly. A key result is that, on average, uncertainty in the overturning at 25°N is dominated by uncertainty in the zonal wind at lags of up to 6.5 yr and by uncertainty in surface heat fluxes thereafter, with winter heat flux uncertainty over the Labrador Sea appearing to play a critically important role.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.051
Threshold uncertainty score0.101

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.252 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations8
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of ClimateSame topicClimate variability and modelsFrench-language works237,207