Historical Reconstruction of Subpolar North Atlantic Overturning and Its Relationship to Density
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The connections between the overturning of the subpolar North Atlantic and regional density changes are assessed on interannual and decadal timescales using historical, data‐based reconstructions of the overturning over the last 60 years and forward model integrations with buoyancy and wind forcing. The data‐based reconstructions reveal a dominant eastern basin contribution to the subpolar overturning in density space and changes in the overturning reaching ±2.5 Sv, which are both in accord with the Overturning in the Subpolar North Atlantic Program (OSNAP). The zonally integrated geostrophic velocity across the basin is connected to boundary contrasts in Montgomery potential in density space. The overturning for the eastern side of the basin is strongly correlated with density changes in the Irminger and Labrador Seas, while the overturning for the western side is correlated with boundary density changes in the Labrador Sea. These boundary density signals are a consequence of local atmospheric forcing and transport of upstream density changes. In forward model experiments, a localized density increase over the Irminger Sea increases the overturning over both sides of the basin due to dense waters spreading to the Labrador Sea. Conversely, a localized density increase over the Labrador Sea only increases the overturning for the western basin and instead eventually decreases the overturning for the eastern basin. Labrador Sea density provides a useful overturning metric by its direct control of the overturning over the western side and lower latitudes of the subpolar basin.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".