CAMEMBERT: A Mini-Neptunes General Circulation Model Intercomparison, Protocol Version 1.0.A CUISINES Model Intercomparison Project
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract With an increased focus on the observing and modeling of mini-Neptunes, there comes a need to better understand the tools we use to model their atmospheres. In this Paper, we present the protocol for the Comparing Atmospheric Models of Extrasolar Mini-Neptunes Building and Envisioning Retrievals and Transits, CAMEMBERT, project, an intercomparison of general circulation models (GCMs) used by the exoplanetary science community to simulate the atmospheres of mini-Neptunes. We focus on two targets well studied both observationally and theoretically with planned JWST cycle 1 observations: the warm GJ 1214b and the cooler K2-18b. For each target, we consider a temperature-forced case, a clear sky dual-gray radiative transfer case, and a clear sky multiband radiative transfer case, covering a range of complexities and configurations where we know differences exist between GCMs in the literature. This Paper presents all the details necessary to participate in the intercomparison, with the intention of presenting the results in future papers. Currently, there are eight GCMs participating (ExoCAM, Exo-FMS, FMS PCM, Generic PCM, MITgcm, RM-GCM, THOR, and the Unified Model), and membership in the project remains open. Those interested in participating are invited to contact the authors.
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 | 0.012 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.046 | 0.018 |
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".