MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4282932473 · doi:10.1038/s41598-022-13568-5

Exceptional warming over the Barents area

2022· article· en· W4282932473 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Ketil Isaksen, Øyvind Nordli, Б. В. Иванов, Morten A. Ø. Køltzow, Signe Aaboe, Herdis M. Gjelten, Abdelkader Mezghani, Steinar Eastwood, Eirik J. Førland, Rasmus Benestad, Inger Hanssen‐Bauer, Ragnar Brækkan, Pavel N. Sviashchennikov, В. И. Демин, Анастасия Ревина, Tatiana Karandasheva

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Reports · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicClimate change and permafrost
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersKlima- og miljødepartementetSaint Petersburg State UniversityAlberta Agricultural Research Institute
KeywordsWarming upGlobal warmingEnvironmental scienceClimate changeEcologyMedicineBiologyPhysiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In recent decades, surface air temperature (SAT) data from Global reanalyses points to maximum warming over the northern Barents area. However, a scarcity of observations hampers the confidence of reanalyses in this Arctic hotspot region. Here, we study the warming over the past 20-40 years based on new available SAT observations and a quality controlled comprehensive SAT dataset from the northern archipelagos in the Barents Sea. We identify a statistically significant record-high annual warming of up to 2.7 °C per decade, with a maximum in autumn of up to 4.0 °C per decade. Our results are compared with the most recent global and Arctic regional reanalysis data sets, as well as remote sensing data records of sea ice concentration (SIC), sea surface temperature (SST) and high-resolution ice charts. The warming pattern is primarily consistent with reductions in sea ice cover and confirms the general spatial and temporal patterns represented by reanalyses. However, our findings suggest even a stronger rate of warming and SIC-SAT relation than was known in this region until now.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.426
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1250.000

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.199 · 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.

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

Citations244
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific ReportsSame topicClimate change and permafrostFrench-language works237,207