MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2904402432 · doi:10.1029/2018jc014036

Projected Freshening of the Arctic Ocean in the 21st Century

2018· article· en· W2904402432 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Qi Shu, Fangli Qiao, Zhenya Song, Jiechen Zhao, Xinfang Li

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Geophysical Research Oceans · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicArctic and Antarctic ice dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsFreshwater inflowOceanographyCoupled model intercomparison projectArcticSurface runoffSea iceEnvironmental sciencePrecipitationArctic geoengineeringFlux (metallurgy)Arctic ice packClimatologyGeologyClimate modelClimate changeSalinityAntarctic sea iceGeographyMeteorology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Using state‐of‐the‐art models from the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project phase 5 (CMIP5), this study found the upper Arctic Ocean likely to freshen considerably in the future. Arctic Ocean average sea surface salinity is projected to decrease by 1.5 ± 1.1 psu, and the liquid freshwater column is projected to increase by 5.4 ± 3.8 m by the end of the 21st century under the Representative Concentration Pathway 8.5 (RCP8.5) scenario. Most freshening would occur in the Arctic Ocean basins, that is, the Canada, Makarov, and Amundsen basins. Anomalies in freshwater flux from sea ice melt, Bering Strait inflow, net precipitation (P‐E), river runoff, and freshwater through the Barents Sea Opening (BSO) would contribute to Arctic Ocean freshening. CMIP5 historical and RCP8.5 experiments showed that the respective projected contributions from BSO freshwater flux, river runoff, P‐E, and Bering Strait inflow are about 6.4, 5.0, 2.7, and 2.2 times the contribution from sea ice melt averaged throughout the 21st century. Contributions from sea ice melt and Bering Strait inflow would increase and then decrease gradually, while those from BSO freshwater flux, river runoff, and P‐E would increase continuously. The CMIP5 models are able to simulate the Arctic Ocean freshwater system more accurately than CMIP3 models. However, the simulated rate of increase of freshwater content (296 ± 232 km 3 /yr) is weaker than estimated (600 ± 300 km 3 /yr) based on observations (1992–2012). Moreover, the simulated BSO and Davis Strait freshwater fluxes still exhibit substantial intermodel spread and they differ considerably from observed values.

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)0.001
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 score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score0.452

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.263 · 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

Citations71
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Geophysical Research OceansSame topicArctic and Antarctic ice dynamicsFrench-language works237,207