Simple Hybrid Sea Ice Nudging Method for Improving Control Over Partitioning of Sea Ice Concentration and Thickness
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract To assess the effect of ocean‐atmosphere coupling in the climate response to forced sea ice loss, the Polar Amplification Model Intercomparison Project protocol includes centennial coupled atmosphere‐ocean general circulation model simulations with imposed sea ice loss. The protocol, which specifies sea ice concentration and thickness distribution targets, does not prescribe a method for achieving them. Although different methods for imposing sea ice loss (or growth) in models have been documented, testing of the method‐dependence of the resulting climate responses has been limited. Achieving the targeted sea ice state has proven to be challenging using the so‐called ghost‐flux nudging method, which induces ice melt from below, as this method does not constrain the partitioning between thickness and concentration. We propose, describe and test a simple method that combines the advantages of direct sea ice nudging and ghost‐flux nudging. The hybrid nudging method better captures the partitioning between thickness and concentration while conserving total water content. We document how this novel sea ice constraining method reaches specific targets, enhances surface turbulent heat flux responses to sea ice loss, and induces tropospheric warming for both polar regions.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".