MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3132904360 · doi:10.1029/2020jc016740

A Changing Arctic Ocean: How Measured and Modeled <sup>129</sup>I Distributions Indicate Fundamental Shifts in Circulation Between 1994 and 2015

2021· article· en· W3132904360 on OpenAlexaffabout
J. N. Smith, Michael Kärcher, Núria Casacuberta, William J. Williams, Tim Kenna, William M. Smethie

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Geophysical Research Oceans · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicArctic and Antarctic ice dynamics
Canadian institutionsNorth Pacific Marine Science OrganizationBedford Institute of Oceanography
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOcean gyreGeotracesArcticOcean currentGeologyBoundary currentOceanographyClimatologyRidgeOceanic basinAnticycloneTRACERCanada BasinCirculation (fluid dynamics)Structural basinThermohaline circulationPhysicsPaleontologySeawater

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract 129 I measurements on samples collected during GEOTRACES oceanographic missions in the Arctic Ocean in 2015 have provided the first synoptic 129 I sections across the Eurasian, Canada, and Makarov Basins. During the 1990s, increased discharges of 129 I from European nuclear fuel reprocessing plants produced a large, tracer spike whose passage through the Arctic Ocean has been followed by 129 I time series measurements over the past 25 years. Elevated 129 I levels measured over the Lomonosov and Alpha‐Mendeleyev Ridges in 2015 were associated with tracer labeled, Atlantic‐origin water bathymetrically steered by the ridge systems through the central Arctic while lower 129 I levels were evident in the more poorly ventilated basin interiors. 129 I levels of 200–400 × 10 7 at/l measured in intermediate waters had increased by a factor of 10 in 2015 compared to 1994–1996 owing to the circulation of the 1990s, 129 I input spike. Comparisons of 129 I distributions between the mid‐1990s and 2015 delineate large scale circulation changes that occurred during the shift from a positive Arctic Oscillation and a cyclonic circulation regime in the mid‐1990s to anticyclonic circulation in 2015. The latter is characterized by a broadened Beaufort Gyre in the upper ocean, a weakened boundary current and partial mid‐depth, AW flow reversal in the southern Canada Basin. Tracer 129 I simulations using the applied circulation model, NAOSIM, agree with both historical 129 I results and recent GEOTRACES data sets, thereby supporting the present interpretation of the relationship of changes in arctic circulation to shifts in climate indices revealed by tracer 129 I distributions.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.091
Threshold uncertainty score0.461

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.250 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations36
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Geophysical Research OceansSame topicArctic and Antarctic ice dynamicsFrench-language works237,207