MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4200142110 · doi:10.1002/essoar.10509444.1

Extratropical shortwave cloud feedbacks in the context of the global circulation and hydrological cycle

2021· preprint· en· W4200142110 on OpenAlexafffund
Daniel T. McCoy, Paul R. Field, Michelle Frazer, Mark D. Zelinka, Gregory S. Elsaesser, Johannes Mülmenstädt, Ivy Tan, Timothy A. Myers, Zachary J. Lebo

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicClimate variability and models
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersPacific Northwest National LaboratoryLawrence Livermore National LaboratoryHorizon 2020 Framework ProgrammeOffice of ScienceBiological and Environmental ResearchNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaEuropean CommissionBattelleUniversity of WyomingU.S. Department of EnergyNational Science Foundation
KeywordsEnvironmental scienceClimatologyShortwaveAlbedo (alchemy)Context (archaeology)General Circulation ModelExtratropical cycloneShortwave radiationClimate modelClimate sensitivityAtmospheric sciencesCloud albedoMoistureClimate changeMeteorologyCloud coverRadiative transferCloud computingGeographyRadiationGeologyOceanography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Shortwave (SW) cloud feedback (SWFB) is the primary driver of uncertainty in the effective climate sensitivity (ECS) predicted by global climate models (GCMs). ECS for several GCMs in the Sixth Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP6) exceed 5K, above the fifth assessment report (AR5) ‘likely’ maximum (4.5K) due to extratropical SWFB’s that are more positive than those simulated in previous generation CMIP5 GCMs. Here we show that across 57 GCMs Southern Ocean SW_FB; can be predicted from the sensitivity of column-integrated liquid water mass (LWP) to moisture convergence and to surface temperature. The response of LWP to moisture convergence and the response of albedo to LWP anti-correlate across GCMs. This is because GCMs that simulate a larger response of LWP to moisture convergence tend to have higher mean-state LWPs, which reduces the impact of additional LWP on albedo. Observational constraints suggest a modestly negative Southern Ocean SWFB— inconsistent with extreme ECS.

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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.045

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.228 · 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

Citations4
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicClimate variability and models→French-language works237,207→