MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3143467840 · doi:10.1029/2020jd033995

Nonlinear Coupling Between Longwave Radiative Climate Feedbacks

2021· article· en· W3143467840 on OpenAlexafffund
Han Huang, Yi Huang

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Geophysical Research Atmospheres · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicClimate variability and models
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaChina Scholarship Council
KeywordsLongwaveRadiative transferEnvironmental scienceClimate modelClimate sensitivityOutgoing longwave radiationCloud feedbackNonlinear systemCoupling (piping)Climate changeAtmospheric sciencesClimatologyWater vaporRadiative forcingMeteorologyConvectionPhysicsMaterials science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The radiative feedbacks of such climate variables as air temperature, water vapor, and clouds influence the energy budget of the climate system. Measuring the strength of each feedback is of critical importance for understanding the climate sensitivity and its spread in climate models. Most feedback analyses to‐date, such as those using the kernel method, have been based on a linear decomposition of the radiation budget and neglect the nonlinear effects between the feedbacks. In this work, we quantify the coupling effects between different longwave radiative feedbacks based on partial radiative perturbations using a radiative transfer model. Two climate change scenarios, the El niño‐Southern Oscillation (ENSO) and the quadrupling CO2 (4xCO2), are examined. We find that the coupling effect between water vapor and cloud is the strongest among all the coupling effects and can amount to 50% or greater of the univariate cloud feedback. This significant coupling effect results from the masking effect of the two feedbacks on each other and can be well explained by a simple analytic model.

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)0.002
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
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)0.0020.000

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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.345
Teacher spread0.294 · 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

Citations22
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Geophysical Research Atmospheres→Same topicClimate variability and models→French-language works237,207→