Deep mixed ocean volume in the Labrador Sea in HighResMIP models
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Simulations from seven global coupled climate models performed at high and standard resolution as part of the high resolution model intercomparison project (HighResMIP) are analyzed to study deep ocean mixing in the Labrador Sea and the impact of increased horizontal resolution. The representation of convection varies strongly among models. Compared to observations from ARGO-floats and the EN4 data set, most models substantially overestimate deep convection in the Labrador Sea. In four out of five models, all four using the NEMO-ocean model, increasing the ocean resolution from 1° to 1/4° leads to increased deep mixing in the Labrador Sea. Increasing the atmospheric resolution has a smaller effect than increasing the ocean resolution. Simulated convection in the Labrador Sea is mainly governed by the release of heat from the ocean to the atmosphere and by the vertical stratification of the water masses in the Labrador Sea in late autumn. Models with stronger sub-polar gyre circulation have generally higher surface salinity in the Labrador Sea and a deeper convection. While the high-resolution models show more realistic ocean stratification in the Labrador Sea than the standard resolution models, they generally overestimate the convection. The results indicate that the representation of sub-grid scale mixing processes might be imperfect in the models and contribute to the biases in deep convection. Since in more than half of the models, the Labrador Sea convection is important for the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation (AMOC), this raises questions about the future behavior of the AMOC in the models.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".