Exploring the impact of a frontal ablation parameterization on projected 21st-century mass change for Northern Hemisphere glaciers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Marine-terminating glaciers cover more than one-fourth of the total glacierized area in the Northern Hemisphere outside the Greenland ice sheet. It is therefore crucial to ensure an adequate representation of these glaciers when projecting large-scale glacier mass changes. We investigate how the introduction of marine frontal processes in the modeling chain influences the results of mass change projections, compared to projections neglecting such processes. We find that including frontal processes reduces the projected glacier mass loss, since incorporating frontal ablation in the model's mass-balance calibration results in a decrease in marine-terminating glaciers’ sensitivity to atmospheric temperatures. We also find that retrograde bed slopes lead to increased frontal ablation as the atmosphere warms, while frontal ablation decreases if bed slopes are prograde. These opposing effects have the potential to partly cancel each other when considering large glacier ensembles. Although we do not account for potential future changes in oceanic climate yet, any effect of these would be moderated by around half of today's marine-terminating glaciers becoming land-terminating in the course of the 21st century. While we find a significant influence of ice flow parameters on our results, boundary conditions remain the largest source of uncertainty in our projections.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".