MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3174264318 · doi:10.32006/eeep.2021.1.0516

INVESTIGATING THE HISTORICAL CORRELATION BETWEEN ATMOSPHERIC CARBON DIOXIDE CONCENTRATION AND GLOBAL TEMPERATURE CHANGE

2021· article· en· W3174264318 on OpenAlexaff
Kneev Sharma, Dimitre Karamanev

Bibliographic record

VenueEcological Engineering and Environment Protection · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicClimate Change and Health Impacts
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGlobal temperatureGlobal warmingCarbon dioxideCarbon dioxide in Earth's atmosphereClimate changeEnvironmental scienceClimatologyAtmospheric sciencesCorrelation coefficientIce coreChemistryMathematicsStatisticsGeologyOceanography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Understanding the fundamental relationship between atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration and temperature rise is essential for tackling the problem of climate change that faces us today. Misconceptions regarding the relationship are widespread due to media and political influences. This investigation aims to address the popular misconception that CO2 concentration directly and naturally leads to global temperature rise. While anthropogenic CO2 emissions seem to affect the rising global atmospheric temperature with a confidence of 95%, it falters when the historical relationship using ice core data is studied. This investigation uses two statistical approaches to determine an accurate range and direction for this important relationship. Through a combined approach, it was found that historically CO2 concentration in the last 650 000 years lags global temperature rise by 1020-1080 years with a maximum correlation coefficient of 0.8371-0.8372. This result is important for the investigation of climate change.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.183 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEcological Engineering and Environment ProtectionSame topicClimate Change and Health ImpactsFrench-language works237,207