MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4213051183 · doi:10.1038/s41467-022-28564-6

Timing of emergence of modern rates of sea-level rise by 1863

2022· article· en· W4213051183 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jennifer Walker, Robert E. Kopp, Christopher M. Little, Benjamin P. Horton

Bibliographic record

VenueNature Communications · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeophysics and Gravity Measurements
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAkademie der NaturwissenschaftenMinistry of Education, IndiaNational Research Foundation SingaporeNational Research FoundationPast Global ChangesChinese Academy of SciencesEarth Observatory of SingaporeNational Science Foundation
KeywordsSea level riseBiologyClimate changeEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sea-level rise is a significant indicator of broader climate changes, and the time of emergence concept can be used to identify when modern rates of sea-level rise emerged above background variability. Yet a range of estimates of the timing persists both globally and regionally. Here, we use a global database of proxy sea-level records of the Common Era (0-2000 CE) and show that globally, it is very likely that rates of sea-level rise emerged above pre-industrial rates by 1863 CE (P = 0.9; range of 1825 [P = 0.66] to 1873 CE [P = 0.95]), which is similar in timing to evidence for early ocean warming and glacier melt. The time of emergence in the North Atlantic reveals a distinct spatial pattern, appearing earliest in the mid-Atlantic region (1872-1894 CE) and later in Canada and Europe (1930-1964 CE). Regional and local sea-level changes occurring over different time periods drive the spatial pattern in emergence, suggesting regional processes underlie centennial-timescale sea-level variability over the Common Era.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.035

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.075
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.222 · 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

Citations66
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNature CommunicationsSame topicGeophysics and Gravity MeasurementsFrench-language works237,207