Sensitivity of ozone return dates to shared socioeconomic pathway in CMIP6 models
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Following the success of the Montreal Protocol, stratospheric ozone is projected to recover over the coming decades as halogenated ozone depleting substances decline. However, future projections of stratospheric ozone recovery are also dependent on assumptions made about the emissions of other gases such as CO2, CH4, and N2O. As a result, the pathway of ozone recovery is sensitive to the choice of future emissions scenario. Here we explore ozone recovery under different Shared Socioeconomic Pathways (SSPs) in 6 CMIP6 models that include interactive chemistry schemes: CESM2-WACCM, CNRM-ESM2-1, GFDL-ESM4, GISS-E2-1-G, MRI-ESM2-0, UKESM1-O-LL. We explore the impact of different SSP scenarios on projections of ozone recovery, the date at which total column ozone returns to historic values, and the healing of the ozone hole. Additionally, we compare global mean return dates with regional return dates and explore the different processes affecting the timing of ozone recovery in these different 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 | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".