MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3166830340

Multiple Equilibria and Abrupt Transitions in Arctic Summer Sea Ice Extent

2006· article· en· W3166830340 on OpenAlexaff
William J. Merryfield, Marika M. Holland, Adam H. Monahan

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicArctic and Antarctic ice dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of VictoriaEnvironment and Climate Change Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSea iceClimatologyArctic sea ice declineArcticArctic ice packIce-albedo feedbackForcing (mathematics)Drift iceGeologyEnvironmental scienceAtmospheric sciencesOceanography
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An application of bifurcation theory to the stability of Arctic sea ice cover is described. After reviewing past such efforts, a simple mathematical representation is developed of processes identified as contributing essentially to abrupt decreases in 21st century Arctic summer sea ice extent in climate model simulations of the Community Climate System Model, version 3 (CCSM3). The resulting nonlinear equations admit abrupt sea ice transitions resembling those in CCSM3 and also plausibly represent further gross aspects of simulated Arctic sea ice evolution such as the accelerating decline in summer ice extent in the late 20th and early 21st centuries. Equilibrium solutions to these equations feature multiple equilibria in a physically relevant parameter regime. This enables abrupt changes to be triggered by infinitesimal changes in forcing in the vicinity of the bifurcation or, alternatively, by finite perturbations some distance from the bifurcation, although numerical experiments suggest that abrupt transitions in CCSM3 may arise mainly from the increasing sensitivity of sea ice to fluctuations in ocean heat transport as ice thickness and extent diminish. A caveat is that behavior following a complete seasonal loss of ice cover is sensitive to aspects of the parameterization of ocean shortwave absorption. The objective is to illuminate the essential processes and not to embellish them or mix them up with others which are less important. The many simplifications also make it possible to see how the various processes interact, but also make it difficult to assess the quantitative validity of the argument. If the ideas have value, it will be because they serve to develop intuition. Thorndike [1992] 1.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.204
Teacher spread0.192 · 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

Citations0
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicArctic and Antarctic ice dynamics→French-language works237,207→