MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4242209505 · doi:10.5194/acpd-10-11659-2010

Multi-model assessment of stratospheric ozone return dates and ozone recovery in CCMVal-2 models

2010· preprint· en· W4242209505 on OpenAlexaff
Veronika Eyring, Irene Cionni, G. E. Bodeker, Andrew Charlton‐Perez, Douglas E. Kinnison, John Scinocca, Darryn W. Waugh, Hideharu Akiyoshi, Slimane Bekki, Martyn P. Chipperfield, M. Dameris, Sandip Dhomse, S. M. Frith, Hella Garny, Andrew Gettelman, Anne Kubin, Ulrike Langematz, E. Mancini, Marion Marchand, Tetsu Nakamura, Luke D. Oman, Steven Pawson, Giovanni Pitari, David A. Plummer, Eugene Rozanov, Theodore G. Shepherd, Kiyotaka Shibata, Wenshou Tian, Peter Braesicke, Steven C. Hardiman, Jean‐François Lamarque, Olaf Morgenstern, J. A. Pyle, Dan Smale, Y. Yamashita

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicAtmospheric Ozone and Climate
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoEnvironment and Climate Change Canada
FundersCenter for Neuroscience and Regenerative MedicineNational Oceanic and Atmospheric AdministrationScheme for Promotion of Academic and Research CollaborationUniversity of Exeter
KeywordsOzoneStratosphereOzone layerAtmospheric sciencesOzone depletionEnvironmental scienceClimatologyGreenhouse gasUpwellingMeteorologyGeographyGeologyOceanography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. Projections of stratospheric ozone from a suite of chemistry-climate models (CCMs) have been analyzed. In addition to a reference simulation where anthropogenic halogenated ozone depleting substances (ODSs) and greenhouse gases (GHGs) vary with time, sensitivity simulations with either ODSs or GHGs concentrations fixed at 1960 levels were performed to disaggregate the drivers of projected ozone changes. These simulations were also used to assess the two distinct milestones of ozone returning to historical values (ozone return dates) and ozone no longer being influenced by ODSs (full ozone recovery). These two milestones are different. The date of ozone returning to historical values does not indicate complete recovery from ODSs in most cases, because GHG induced changes accelerate or decelerate ozone changes in many regions. In the upper stratosphere where GHG induced stratospheric cooling increases ozone, full ozone recovery has not likely occurred by 2100 while ozone returns to its 1980 or even 1960 levels well before (~2025 and 2040, respectively). In contrast, in the tropical lower stratosphere ozone decreases continuously from 1960 to 2100 due to projected increases in tropical upwelling, while by around 2040 it is already very likely that full recovery from the effects of ODSs has occurred, although ODS concentrations are still elevated by this date. In the lower midlatitude stratosphere the evolution differs from that in the tropics, and rather than a steady decrease of ozone, first a decrease of ozone is simulated between 1960 and 2000, which is then followed by a steady increase throughout the 21st century. Ozone in the lower stratosphere midlatitudes returns to its 1980 levels ${\\sim}$2045 in the NH and ~2055 in the SH, and full ozone recovery is likely reached by 2100 in both hemispheres. Overall, in all regions except the tropical lower stratosphere, full ozone recovery from ODSs occurs significantly later than the return of total column ozone to its 1980 level. The latest return of total column ozone is projected to occur over Antarctica (~2050–2060) whereas it is not likely that full ozone recovery is reached by the end of the 21st century in this region. Arctic total column ozone is projected to return to 1980 levels well before Cly does so (~2020–2030) and while it is likely that full recovery of ozone from the effects of ODSs has occurred by ~2035, at no time before 2100 is it very likely that full recovery has occurred. In contrast to the Antarctic, by 2100 Arctic total column ozone is projected to be above 1960 levels, but not in the fixed GHG simulation, indicating that climate change plays a significant role.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.082
Threshold uncertainty score0.163

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.238 · 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

Citations14
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAtmospheric Ozone and ClimateFrench-language works237,207