MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4322765699 · doi:10.1029/2022gl100563

Large Contribution of Ozone‐Depleting Substances to Global and Arctic Warming in the Late 20th Century

2023· article· en· W4322765699 on OpenAlexaffabout
Michael Sigmond, Lorenzo M. Polvani, John C. Fyfe, Chris Smith, Jason N. S. Cole, Mark England

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysical Research Letters · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicAtmospheric Ozone and Climate
Canadian institutionsEnvironment and Climate Change Canada
FundersInternational Institute for Applied Systems AnalysisNatural Environment Research CouncilSight Research UKNational Science Foundation
KeywordsClimatologyGlobal warmingEnvironmental scienceArcticRadiative forcingClimate changeOzone depletionMontreal ProtocolThe arcticAtmospheric sciencesForcing (mathematics)Arctic geoengineeringOzone layerArctic ice packSea iceOceanographyGeologyStratosphere

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract While previous studies have suggested a substantial role of ozone‐depleting substances (ODSs) in historical climate change, their relative contribution to historical anthropogenic warming has not been quantified before. Analyzing all‐but‐one‐forcing, 20‐member ensembles of historical simulations with a state‐of‐the‐art Earth System Model, we find that over the 1955–2005 period ODSs are responsible for 30% of global warming, 37% of Arctic warming, and 33% of summertime Arctic sea ice loss. Effective Radiative Forcing (ERF) calculations reveal that the global warming response to ODSs per unit of ERF is about 20% larger than for CO 2 , which may be due to stronger feedbacks and the difference in temporal evolution with ODSs having leveled off and CO 2 still increasing in 2005. While the response to both peaks in the Arctic, the ODS ERF opposes Arctic amplification more than the CO 2 ERF. Our findings highlight the importance of the Montreal Protocol for mitigating future climate change.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.051
Threshold uncertainty score0.101

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.273 · 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 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

Citations14
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeophysical Research Letters→Same topicAtmospheric Ozone and Climate→French-language works237,207→