MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3129152486

Isentropic constraints by midlatitude surface warming on the Arctic midtroposphere

2013· article· en· W3129152486 on OpenAlexaff
Frédéric Laliberté, Paul J. Kushner

Bibliographic record

VenueEGU General Assembly Conference Abstracts · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicClimate variability and models
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMiddle latitudesClimatologyArcticEnvironmental scienceGlobal warmingAtmospheric sciencesClimate modelLatitudeClimate changeGeologyOceanography
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

[1] In simulations of 21st century climate, it is argued that changes in midlatitude near-surface moisture and temperature could explain the autumn midtropospheric Arctic warming. The argument is based on a comparison between the Arctic midtropospheric warming and theoretical estimates in which synoptic scale transient eddies propagate near-surface warming anomalies along either dry potential temperature surfaces or equivalent (moist) potential temperature surfaces. In most models, it is observed that the Arctic midtropospheric warming can be obtained from the propagation of midlatitude near-surface warming anomalies according to a dynamic that is intermediate between the dry and moist theories. While many models follow more closely the moist theory, few follow more closely the dry theory. This finding suggests that, as for the tropical atmosphere, theories of high-latitude midtropospheric warming based on changes in poleward heat fluxes should include a moist component.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.211 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEGU General Assembly Conference AbstractsSame topicClimate variability and modelsFrench-language works237,207