Variations of oceanic and atmospheric heat fluxes in the North Atlantic and their link to the North Atlantic Oscillation Index
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Interannual variations in the upper ocean heat and freshwater contents in the subpolar North Atlantic has important climatic effect. It affects the intensity of deep convection, which, in turn, forms the link between upper and deep ocean circulation of the global ocean Conveyor Belt. The upper ocean heat content is primarily affected by two main process: by the ocean-atmosphere heat exchange and by oceanic heat advection. The intensity of both fluxes in the subpolar gyre is linked to the character of atmospheric circulation, largely determined by the phase of the North Atlantic Oscillation (NAO). To study the interannual variability of the oceanic heat advection (in the upper 500th meters layer) we compare the results from four different data-sets: ARMOR-3D (1993-2018), SODA3.4.2 and SODA3.12.2 (1980-2017), and ORAS5 (1958-2017). The ocean-atmosphere heat exchange is accessed as the sum of the latent and the sensible heat fluxes, obtained from OAFlux data-set (1958-2016). The oceanic heat advection to the Labrador and to the Irminger seas has high negative correlation (-0.79) with that into the Nordic Seas. During the years with high winter NAO Index (NAOI) the oceanic heat advection into the Subpolar Gyre decreases, while to the Nordic Seas – increases. These variations go in parallel with the intensification of the Norwegian, the West Spitsbergen and the slope East Greenland currents and weakening of the West Greenland and the Irminger Currents. During the years with high NAOI, the ocean heat release (both sensible and latent) over the Labrador and Irminger seas increases, but over the Norwegian Sea it decreases. In summary, the results show that, during the positive NAO phase, the observed decrease of the heat content in the upper Labrador and Irminger seas is linked to both, a higher oceanic het release and a lower intensity of advection of warm water from the south. In the Norwegian Sea, the opposite sign of variations of the fluxes above leads to a simultaneous warming of the upper ocean. The investigation is supported by the Russian Scientific Foundation (RSF), number of project 17-17-01151.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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".