Sudden Stratospheric Warmings - The Role of Radiation Revealed Through an Energy Budget Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sudden stratospheric warmings (SSWs) are impressive events that occur in the winter hemisphere's polar stratosphere and are capable of producing temperature anomalies upwards of +50 degrees within a matter of days. While much work has been dedicated towards determining how SSWs occur and their ability to interact with the underlying troposphere, one under-explored aspect of SSWs is the role of radiation. Using a radiative transfer model and an energy budget analysis for distinct layers of the stratosphere, this work accounts for the radiative contribution to the removal of the anomalous energy associated with SSWs. In total, 19 events are investigated over the 1979-2016 period. This work reveals that in the absence of dynamical heating following major SSWs, longwave radiative cooling dominates and often results in a strong negative temperature anomaly. The stratospheric temperature change driven by the radiative cooling is characterized by an exponential decay of the temperature anomaly with an increasing e-folding time of 6.3 ± 2.6 to 21.6 ± 8.3 days from the upper to lower stratosphere. This work also demonstrates a negligible impact that water vapour and ozone have on the longwave and shortwave radiative heating rates during SSWs when the concentrations of these gases are perturbed from their climatological state.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".