The relative roles of Arctic and Antarctic sea-ice loss in the response to greenhouse warming
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Antarctic sea ice has gradually increased in extent over the forty-year-long satellite record, in contrast with the clear decrease in sea-ice extent seen in the Arctic over the same time period. However, state-of-the-art climate models ubiquitously project Antarctic sea-ice to decrease over the coming century, much as they do for Arctic sea-ice. Several recent years have also seen record low Antarctic sea-ice. It is therefore of interest to understand what the climate response to Antarctic sea-ice loss will be. We have carried out new fully coupled climate model simulations to assess the response to sea-ice loss in either hemisphere separately or coincidentally under different albedo parameter settings to determine the relative importance of each. By perturbing the albedo of the snow overlying the sea ice and the albedo of the bare sea ice, we obtain a suite of simulations to assess the linearity and additivity of sea-ice loss. We find the response to sea-ice loss in each hemisphere exhibits a high degree of additivity, and can simply be decomposed into responses due to loss in each hemisphere separately. We find that the response to Antarctic sea-ice loss exceeds that of Arctic sea-ice loss in the tropics, and that Antarctic sea-ice loss leads to statistically significant Arctic warming, while the opposite is not true. With these new simulations and one in which CO2 is instantaneously doubled , we can further characterize the response to sea-ice loss from each hemisphere using an extension to classical pattern scaling that includes three controlling parameters. This allows us to simultaneously compute the sensitivity patterns to Arctic sea-ice loss, Antarctic sea-ice loss, and to tropical warming. The statistically significant response to Antarctic sea-ice loss in the Northern Hemisphere extratropics is found to be mediated by tropical warming and small amounts of Arctic sea-ice loss.
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) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".