Southern Ocean upwelling and eddies: sensitivity of the global overturning to the surface density range
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A simple interhemispheric ocean model is used to examine the sensitivity of water sinking in the northern hemisphere to the equator-to-pole density contrast. The model assumes that the sinking is compensated by upwelling in both the low latitude ocean and the Southern Ocean. We compare two vertical mixing schemes: one with a fixed vertical diffusivity and another with fixed mixing energy. The latter case implies that the vertical diffusivity depends on the simulated oceanic circulation. It is shown that when Southern Ocean upwelling is controlled only by northward Ekman transport, the rate of deep water formation has an opposite dependence on the equator-to-pole density contrast between the two vertical mixing schemes. However, when Southern Ocean upwelling is controlled by both Ekman transportandstrong enough eddy-induced transport across the Antarctic Circumpolar Current, the two mixing schemes give qualitatively similar dependence: the rate of water sinking increases with the equator-to-pole density contrast, regardless of whether the diffusivity or the mixing energy is held fixed. It is suggested that the ACC eddies and vertical mixing jointly control the response of the overturning circulation to changes in the equator-to-pole density contrast.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".