Modelling high-latitude explosive eruptions and their atmospheric and environmental impacts
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Large explosive volcanic eruptions inject sulphur into the stratosphere where it is converted to sulphur dioxide and sulphate aerosols. Due to atmospheric circulation patterns, aerosols from high-latitude eruptions typically remain concentrated in the hemisphere in which they are injected. Eruptions in the high-latitude Northern Hemisphere could thus lead to a stronger hemispheric radiative forcing and surface climate response than tropical eruptions, a claim that is supported by a previous study based on proxy records and the coupled aerosol-general circulation model MAECHAM5-HAM. Additionally, the subsequent surface deposition of volcanic sulphate is potentially harmful to humans and ecosystems, and an improved understanding of the deposition over polar ice sheets can contribute to better reconstructions of historical volcanic forcing. On this basis, we model Icelandic explosive eruptions in a pre-industrial atmosphere, taking both volcanic sulphur and halogen loading into account. We use the fully coupled Earth system model CESM2 with the atmospheric component WACCM6, which extends to the lower thermosphere and has prognostic stratospheric aerosols and full chemistry. In order to study the volcanic impacts on the atmosphere, environment, and sulphate deposition, we vary eruption parameters such as sulphur and halogen loading, and injection altitude and season. The modelled volcanic sulphate deposition is compared to the deposition in ice cores following comparable historical eruptions. Furthermore, we evaluate the potential environmental impacts of sulphate deposition. To study inter-model differences, we also compare the CESM2-WACCM6 simulations to similar Icelandic eruption experiments simulated with MAECHAM5-HAM.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| 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".