MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2892198451 · doi:10.1175/jcli-d-18-0192.1

The Role of Extratropical Ocean Warming in the Coupled Climate Response to Arctic Sea Ice Loss

2018· article· en· W2892198451 on OpenAlexafffund
Russell Blackport, Paul J. Kushner

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Climate · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicArctic and Antarctic ice dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsExtratropical cycloneClimatologySea iceIce-albedo feedbackArctic sea ice declineEnvironmental scienceArctic ice packArcticArctic geoengineeringSea surface temperatureArctic dipole anomalyForcing (mathematics)Atmospheric sciencesAtmospheric circulationGeologyAntarctic sea iceOceanography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The role of extratropical ocean warming in the coupled climate response to Arctic sea ice loss is investigated using coupled atmosphere–ocean general circulation model (AOGCM) and uncoupled atmospheric-only (AGCM) experiments. Coupled AOGCM experiments driven by sea ice albedo reduction and greenhouse gas–dominated radiative forcing are used to diagnose the extratropical sea surface temperature (SST) response to sea ice loss. Sea ice loss is then imposed in AGCM experiments both with and without these extratropical SST changes, which are found to extend beyond the regions where sea ice is lost. Sea ice loss in isolation drives warming that is confined to the Arctic lower troposphere and only a weak atmospheric circulation response. When the extratropical SST response caused by sea ice loss is also included in the forcing, the warming extends into the Arctic midtroposphere during winter. This coincides with a stronger atmospheric circulation response, including an equatorward shift in the eddy-driven jet, a deepening of the Aleutian low, and an expansion of the Siberian high. Similar results are found whether the extratropical SST forcing is taken directly from the AOGCM driven by sea ice loss, or whether they are diagnosed using a two-parameter pattern scaling technique where tropical adjustment to sea ice loss is removed. These results suggest that AGCM experiments that are driven by sea ice loss and only local SST increases will underestimate the Arctic midtroposphere warming and atmospheric circulation response to sea ice loss, compared to AOGCM simulations and the real world.

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)0.000
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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.241
Teacher spread0.233 · 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

Citations41
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of ClimateSame topicArctic and Antarctic ice dynamicsFrench-language works237,207