Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Different strategies have been proposed in previous studies for monitoring the Atlantic meridional overturning circulation (AMOC). As well as arrays to directly monitor the AMOC strength, various fingerprints have been suggested to represent an aspect of the AMOC based on properties such as temperature and density. The additional value of fingerprints potentially includes the ability to detect a change earlier than a change in the AMOC itself, the ability to extend a time series back into the past, and the ability to detect crossing a threshold. In this study we select metrics that have been proposed as fingerprints in previous studies and evaluate their ability to detect AMOC changes in a number of scenarios (internal variability, weakening from increased greenhouse gases, weakening from hosing and hysteresis) in the eddy-permitting coupled climate model HadGEM3-GC2. We find that the metrics that perform best are the temperature metrics based on large-scale differences, the large-scale meridional density gradient, and the vertical density difference in the Labrador Sea. The best metric for monitoring the AMOC depends somewhat on the processes driving the change. Hence the best strategy would be to consider multiple fingerprints to provide early detection of all likely AMOC changes.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".