MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4248465233 · doi:10.1002/essoar.10507631.1

On the detection of COVID-driven changes in atmospheric carbon dioxide

2021· preprint· en· W4248465233 on OpenAlexaff
Nicole S. Lovenduski, Abhishek Chatterjee, Neil C. Swart, John C. Fyfe, Ralph F. Keeling, David Schimel

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicCOVID-19 impact on air quality
Canadian institutionsEnvironment and Climate Change Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)World Wide Web2019-20 coronavirus outbreakComputer scienceMedicineVirologyOutbreak

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We assess the detectability of COVID-like emissions reductions in global atmospheric CO 2 concentrations using a suite of large ensembles conducted with an Earth system model. We find a unique fingerprint of COVID in the simulated growth rate of CO 2 sampled at the locations of surface measurement sites. Negative anomalies in growth rates persist from January 2020 through December 2021, reaching a maximum in February 2021. However, this fingerprint is not formally detectable unless we force the model with unrealistically large emissions reductions. Internal variability and carbon-concentration feedbacks obscure the detectability of short-term emission reductions in atmospheric CO 2 . COVID-driven changes in the simulated interhemispheric CO 2 gradient and column-averaged dry air mole fractions of CO 2 (total column or XCO 2 ) are eclipsed by large internal variability. Carbon-concentration feedbacks begin to operate almost immediately after the emissions reduction; these feedbacks reduce the emissions-driven signal in the atmosphere carbon reservoir and further confound signal detection.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.255 · 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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCOVID-19 impact on air qualityFrench-language works237,207