MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4321501068 · doi:10.5194/egusphere-egu23-2604

The Model Intercomparison Project on the Climatic Response to Volcanic Forcing (VolMIP): Status and Future Perspectives of the Initiative

2023· preprint· en· W4321501068 on OpenAlexaff
Davide Zanchettin, Claudia Timmreck, Myriam Khodri, Kirstin Krüger, Francesco S. R. Pausata, Alan Robock, Anja Schmidt, Matthew Toohey

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicClimate variability and models
Canadian institutionsUniversity of SaskatchewanUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCoupled model intercomparison projectForcing (mathematics)Climate modelVolcanoEnvironmental scienceProtocol (science)ClimatologyMeteorologyClimate changeGridComputer scienceGeologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Model Intercomparison Project on the climatic response to Volcanic forcing (VolMIP) is a protocol-driven international initiative under the umbrella of the sixth phase of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP6) aiming at coordinating the activities of different Research Institutes involved in numerical climate modelling focused on a multi-model assessment of climate models' performance under strong volcanic forcing conditions. The main objective of the initiative is to assess to what extent responses of the coupled ocean-atmosphere system to the same applied strong volcanic forcing are robustly simulated across state-of-the-art coupled climate models and identify the causes that limit robust simulated behavior, especially differences in their treatment of physical processes. To this purpose, four Tier-1 (mandatory) experiments branched into two main sets, named “volc-pinatubo” and “volc-long” were defined, together with eight more lower-priority experiments. Six years since the definition of the VolMIP protocol (Zanchettin et al., 2016), ensemble simulations of most of the mandatory VolMIP experiments have been completed and made publicly available through the Earth System Grid Federation open platform, with the first VolMIP results being currently published and several analyses in progress. The long turnover time between the experiment design, the integration of the simulations and the analysis of the output motivates an assessment of the overall effectiveness of the VolMIP strategy, particularly in the light of a possible second phase of the initiative.In this contribution, we will illustrate the status of the initiative, highlight its major achievements and discuss its future perspective in the light of emergent scientific questions regarding volcanically forced climate variability.Zanchettin, D., Khodri, M., Timmreck, C., Toohey, M., Schmidt, A., Gerber, E. P., Hegerl, G., Robock, A., Pausata, F. S. R., Ball, W. T., Bauer, S. E., Bekki, S., Dhomse, S. S., LeGrande, A. N., Mann, G. W., Marshall, L., Mills, M., Marchand, M., Niemeier, U., Poulain, V., Rozanov, E., Rubino, A., Stenke, A., Tsigaridis, K., and Tummon, F.: The Model Intercomparison Project on the climatic response to Volcanic forcing (VolMIP): experimental design and forcing input data for CMIP6, Geosci. Model Dev., 9, 2701–2719, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-2701-2016, 2

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)0.086
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.029
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.086
Threshold uncertainty score0.453

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0860.029
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0060.006
Open science0.0060.009
Research integrity0.0040.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.002

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 head0.069
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.242 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicClimate variability and models→French-language works237,207→