MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3186987540 · doi:10.1007/s00382-021-05755-3

Circulation adjustment in the Arctic and Atlantic in response to Greenland and Antarctic mass loss

2021· article· en· W3186987540 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jelle van den Berk, Sybren Drijfhout, Wilco Hazeleger

Bibliographic record

VenueClimate Dynamics · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicArctic and Antarctic ice dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersEuropean Commission
KeywordsOcean gyreMeltwaterGeologyOceanographyForcing (mathematics)ArcticAdvectionAlgorithmClimatologySnowGeomorphologyPhysicsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Following a high-end projection for mass loss from the Greenland and Antarctic ice-sheets, a freshwater forcing was applied to the ocean surface in the coupled climate model EC-Earthv2.2 to study the response to meltwater release assuming an RCP8.5 emission scenario. The meltwater forcing results in an overall freshening of the Atlantic that is dominated by advective changes, strongly enhancing the freshening due to dilution by Greenland meltwater release. The strongest circulation change occurs in the western North Atlantic subpolar gyre and in the gyre in the Nordic Seas, leaving the North Atlantic subpolar gyre the region where most advective salt export occurs. Associated with counteracting changes in both gyre systems, the response of the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation is rather weak over the 190 years of the experiment; it reduces with only 1 Sv ( $$= 10^6$$ <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"> <mml:mrow> <mml:mo>=</mml:mo> <mml:msup> <mml:mn>10</mml:mn> <mml:mn>6</mml:mn> </mml:msup> </mml:mrow> </mml:math> m $$^3$$ <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"> <mml:msup> <mml:mrow/> <mml:mn>3</mml:mn> </mml:msup> </mml:math> s $$^{-1}$$ <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"> <mml:msup> <mml:mrow/> <mml:mrow> <mml:mo>-</mml:mo> <mml:mn>1</mml:mn> </mml:mrow> </mml:msup> </mml:math> ), compared to changes in the subpolar gyre of 5 Sv. This relative insensitivity of the AMOC to the forcing is attributed to enhanced convection in the Nordic Seas and stronger overflows that compensate reduced convection in the Labrador and Irminger Seas, and lead to higher sea surface temperatures (SSTs) in the former and lower SSTs in the latter region. The weakened subpolar gyre in the west also shifts the North Atlantic Current and the subpolar-subtropical gyre boundary; with the subtropical gyre expanding, and the western subpolar gyre contracting. The SST changes are associated with obduction of Atlantic waters in the Nordic Seas that would otherwise obduct in the western subpolar gyre. The anomalous SSTs also induce a coupled ocean-atmosphere feedback that further strengthens the Nordic Seas circulation and weakens the western subpolar gyre. This occurs because the anomalous SST-gradient enhances the westerlies, especially between 65 $$^{\circ }$$ <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"> <mml:msup> <mml:mrow/> <mml:mo>∘</mml:mo> </mml:msup> </mml:math> N and 70 $$^{\circ }$$ <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"> <mml:msup> <mml:mrow/> <mml:mo>∘</mml:mo> </mml:msup> </mml:math> N; the associated increase in windstress curl consequently enhances the gyre in the Nordic Seas. This feedback is driven by the Greenland mass loss; Antarctic meltwater discharge causes a weaker, opposite response and more particularly affects the South Atlantic salinity budget through northward advection of low-salinity waters from the Southern Ocean. This effect, however, becomes visible only hundred years after the onset of Antarctic mass loss. We conclude that the response to freshwater forcing from both ice caps can lead to a complex response in the Atlantic circulation systems with opposing effects in different subbasins. The relative strength of the response is time-dependent and largely governed by internal feedbacks; the forcing acts mainly as a trigger and is decoupled from the response.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.141
Threshold uncertainty score0.722

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.209 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations23
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClimate DynamicsSame topicArctic and Antarctic ice dynamicsFrench-language works237,207