MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4235404476 · doi:10.1002/essoar.10505094.1

Future sea level change under CMIP5 and CMIP6 scenarios from the Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets

2020· preprint· en· W4235404476 on OpenAlexaff
A. J. Payne, Sophie Nowicki, Ayako Abe‐Ouchi, Cécile Agosta, Patrick Alexander, Torsten Albrecht, Xylar Asay‐Davis, Andy Aschwanden, Alice Barthel, Thomas J. Bracegirdle, Reinhard Calov, Christopher Chambers, Youngmin Choi, Richard Cullather, Joshua Cuzzone, Christophe dumas, Tamsin Edwards, F. Denis, Xavier Fettweis, Benjamin K. Galton‐Fenzi, Heiko Goelzer, Rupert Gladstone, Nicholas R. Golledge, Jonathan M. Gregory, Ralf Greve, Tore Hattermann, Matthew J. Hoffman, Angelika Humbert, Philippe Huybrechts, Nicolas C. Jourdain, Thomas Kleiner, Peter Kuipers Munneke, Eric Larour, Sébastien Le clec’h, Victoria Lee, Gunter Leguy, William H. Lipscomb, Christopher M. Little, Daniel P. Lowry, Mathieu Morlighem, Isabel Nias, Frank Pattyn, Tyler Pelle, Stephen Price, Aurélien Quiquet, Ronja Reese, Martin Rückamp, Nicole‐Jeanne Schlegel, Hélène Seroussi, Andrew Shepherd, Erika Simon, Donald Slater, Robin S. Smith, Fiammetta Straneo, Sainan Sun, Lev Tarasov, Luke D. Trusel, Jonas Van Breedam, Roderik S. W. van de Wal, M. R. van den Broeke, Ricarda Winkelmann, Chen Zhao, Tong Zhang, Thomas Zwinger

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeophysics and Gravity Measurements
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWorld Wide WebLibrary scienceComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Projections of the sea level contribution from the Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets rely on atmospheric and oceanic drivers obtained from climate models. The Earth System Models participating in the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project phase 6 (CMIP6) generally project greater future warming compared with the previous CMIP5 effort. Here we use four CMIP6 models and a selection of CMIP5 models to force multiple ice sheet models as part of the Ice Sheet Model Intercomparison Project for CMIP6 (ISMIP6). We find that the projected sea level contribution at 2100 from the ice sheet model ensemble under the CMIP6 scenarios falls within the CMIP5 range for the Antarctic ice sheet but is significantly increased for Greenland. Warmer atmosphere in CMIP6 models results in higher Greenland mass loss due to surface melt. For Antarctica, CMIP6 forcing is similar to CMIP5 and mass gain from increased snowfall counteracts increased loss due to ocean warming.

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)0.000
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 score0.047
Threshold uncertainty score0.959

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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 communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.101
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.138 · 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

Citations25
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGeophysics and Gravity MeasurementsFrench-language works237,207