MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3138130580 · doi:10.1029/2020gl092263

The Ocean Carbon Response to COVID‐Related Emissions Reductions

2021· article· en· W3138130580 on OpenAlexaff
Nicole S. Lovenduski, Neil C. Swart, Adrienne J. Sutton, John C. Fyfe, Galen A. McKinley, Christopher L. Sabine, Nancy L. Williams

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysical Research Letters · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicCOVID-19 impact on air quality
Canadian institutionsEnvironment and Climate Change Canada
FundersNational Science Foundation
KeywordsEnvironmental scienceCarbon dioxideGreenhouse gasCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Carbon dioxide in Earth's atmosphereAtmospheric sciencesCarbon cycleAtmosphere (unit)Carbon fibersClimate changeEarth system scienceClimatologyMeteorologyOceanographyChemistryGeologyGeographyEcologyEcosystemComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The decline in global emissions of carbon dioxide due to the COVID‐19 pandemic provides a unique opportunity to investigate the sensitivity of the global carbon cycle and climate system to emissions reductions. Recent efforts to study the response to these emissions declines has not addressed their impact on the ocean, yet ocean carbon absorption is particularly susceptible to changing atmospheric carbon concentrations. Here, we use ensembles of simulations conducted with an Earth system model to explore the potential detection of COVID‐related emissions reductions in the partial pressure difference in carbon dioxide between the surface ocean and overlying atmosphere (ΔpCO2), a quantity that is regularly measured. We find a unique fingerprint in global‐scale ΔpCO2 that is attributable to COVID, though the fingerprint is difficult to detect in individual model realizations unless we force the model with a scenario that has four times the observed emissions reduction.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.058

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.388
Teacher spread0.337 · 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

Citations14
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeophysical Research LettersSame topicCOVID-19 impact on air qualityFrench-language works237,207