MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4220902169 · doi:10.1029/2021gl097491

Baroclinic Control of Southern Ocean Eddy Upwelling Near Topography

2022· article· en· W4220902169 on OpenAlexaff
Alice Barthel, Andrew McC. Hogg, Stephanie Waterman, Shane R. Keating

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysical Research Letters · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicOceanographic and Atmospheric Processes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBaroclinityUpwellingEddyGeologyMesoscale meteorologyIsopycnalClimatologyOceanographyMeteorologyTurbulenceGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In the Southern Ocean, mesoscale eddies contribute to the upwelling of deep waters along sloping isopycnals, helping to close the upper branch of the meridional overturning circulation. Eddy energy (EE) is not uniformly distributed along the Antarctic Circumpolar Current (ACC). Instead, “hotspots” of EE that are associated with enhanced eddy‐induced upwelling exist downstream of topographic features. This study shows that, in idealized eddy‐resolved simulations, a topographic feature in the ACC path can enhance and localize eddy‐induced upwelling. However, the upwelling systematically occurs in regions where eddies grow through baroclinic instability, rather than in regions where EE is large. Across a range of parameters, along‐stream eddy growth rate is a more reliable indicator of eddy upwelling than traditional parameterizations such as eddy kinetic energy, eddy potential energy, or isopycnal slope. Ocean eddy parameterizations should consider metrics specific to the growth of baroclinic instability to accurately model eddy upwelling near topography.

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)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.237 · 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

Citations18
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeophysical Research LettersSame topicOceanographic and Atmospheric ProcessesFrench-language works237,207