MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3138834838 · doi:10.1029/2020gl091540

Limited Influence of Localized Tropical Sea‐Surface Temperatures on Moisture Transport into the Arctic

2021· article· en· W3138834838 on OpenAlexaff
Etienne Dunn‐Sigouin, Camille Li, Paul J. Kushner

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysical Research Letters · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicClimate variability and models
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMoistureClimatologyArcticEnvironmental scienceSea surface temperatureAtmospheric sciencesEddyThe arcticGeologyOceanographyMeteorologyPhysicsTurbulence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Arctic moisture transport is dominated by planetary‐scale waves in reanalysis. Planetary waves are influenced by localized Sea‐Surface Temperature (SST) features such as the tropical warm pool. Here, an aquaplanet model is used to clarify the link between tropical SST anomalies and Arctic moisture transport. In a zonally uniform setup with no climatological east‐west gradients, Arctic moisture transport is dominated by transient planetary waves, as in reanalysis. Warming tropical SSTs by heating the ocean strengthens Arctic moisture transport, mediated mostly by changes in water vapor rather than eddies. This strengthening occurs whether the tropical warming is zonally uniform or localized. Cooling tropical SSTs weakens Arctic moisture transport; however, unlike warming, the pattern matters, with localized cooling producing stronger transport changes owing to nonlinear feedbacks in the surface energy budget. Thus, the simulations show that localized tropical SST anomalies influence Arctic moisture transport differently than uniform anomalies, but only in cooling scenarios.

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 score0.039
Threshold uncertainty score0.078

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 communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.269 · 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

Citations17
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeophysical Research Letters→Same topicClimate variability and models→French-language works237,207→