MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3087364100 · doi:10.1038/s41467-020-18478-6

Global temperature modes shed light on the Holocene temperature conundrum

2020· article· en· W3087364100 on OpenAlexaff
Jürgen Bader, Johann Jungclaus, N. A. Krivova, Stephan Lorenz, Amanda C. Maycock, Thomas Raddatz, Hauke Schmidt, Matthew Toohey, Chi‐Ju Wu, Martin Claußen

Bibliographic record

VenueNature Communications · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeology and Paleoclimatology Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersBundesministerium für Bildung und ForschungDeutsches Klimarechenzentrum
KeywordsHoloceneGlobal coolingClimatologyGlobal warmingClimate changeGlobal temperatureProxy (statistics)Mode (computer interface)Environmental sciencePaleoclimatologyMean radiant temperatureClimate modelGeologyGlobal changeArcticAtmospheric sciencesOceanography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Reconstructions of the global mean annual temperature evolution during the Holocene yield conflicting results. One temperature reconstruction shows global cooling during the late Holocene. The other reconstruction reveals global warming. Here we show that both a global warming mode and a cooling mode emerge when performing a spatio-temporal analysis of annual temperature variability during the Holocene using data from a transient climate model simulation. The warming mode is most pronounced in the tropics. The simulated cooling mode is determined by changes in the seasonal cycle of Arctic sea-ice that are forced by orbital variations and volcanic eruptions. The warming mode dominates in the mid-Holocene, whereas the cooling mode takes over in the late Holocene. The weighted sum of the two modes yields the simulated global temperature trend evolution. Our findings have strong implications for the interpretation of proxy data and the selection of proxy locations to compute global mean temperatures.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.252 · 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 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

Citations187
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNature CommunicationsSame topicGeology and Paleoclimatology ResearchFrench-language works237,207