The Arctic Ozone Hole in March 2020 and Its Seasonal Prediction in CFSv2: A Comparative Study with the 1997 and 2011 Arctic Ozone Holes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Using reanalysis data, observations, and seasonal forecasts, the March Arctic ozone hole events in 1997, 2011, and 2020 and their predictability are compared. All of the three ozone hole events were accompanied by an extremely strong and cold polar vortex. The shape and centroid of the ozone holes are mainly controlled by the simultaneous polar vortex. The March 2020 ozone hole was displaced towards Canada and Greenland, the March 2011 ozone low was evenly distributed over the North Pole, while the 1997 ozone hole was displaceds toward Arctic Russia. The predictability of the 2011 ozone hole event is longer (1–2 months) than the other two (~1 month) possibly due to La Niña and Quasi-Biennial westerly winds, favorable for formation of a strong polar vortex. Surprisingly, an empirical model using a substitute index to forecast the Arctic ozone might be as skillful as the general circulation model with a chemistry module.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".