Impacts of Climate Change on Volcanic Stratospheric Injections: Comparison of 1‐D and 3‐D Plume Model Projections
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Explosive volcanic eruptions are one of the most important driver of climate variability. Yet, we still lack a fundamental understanding of how climate change may affect future eruptions. Here, we use an ensemble of simulations by 1‐D and 3‐D volcanic plume models spanning a large range of eruption source and atmospheric conditions to assess changes in the dynamics of future eruptive columns. Our results shed new light on differences between the predictions of 1‐D and 3‐D plume models. Furthermore, both models suggest that as a result of ongoing climate change, for tropical eruptions, (i) higher eruption intensities will be required for plumes to reach the upper troposphere/lower stratosphere and (ii) the height of plumes currently reaching the upper troposphere/lower stratosphere or above will increase. We discuss the implications of these results for the climatic impacts of future eruptions. Our simulations can directly inform climate model experiments on climate‐volcano feedback.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".