Radiative sensitivity quantified by a new set of radiation flux kernels based on the ECMWF Reanalysis v5 (ERA5)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. Radiative sensitivity, i.e., the response of the radiative flux to climate perturbations, is essential to understanding climate change and variability. The sensitivity kernels computed by radiative transfer models have been broadly used for assessing the climate forcing and feedbacks for global warming. As these assessments are largely focused on the top of atmosphere (TOA) radiation budget, less attention has been paid to the surface radiation budget or the associated surface radiative sensitivity kernels. Based on the fifth generation European Center for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts atmospheric reanalysis (ERA5), we produce a new set of radiative kernels for both the TOA and surface radiative fluxes, which is made available at https://doi.org/10.17632/vmg3s67568 (Huang and Huang, 2023). By comparing these with other published radiative kernels, we find that the TOA kernels are generally in agreement in terms of global mean radiative sensitivity and analyzed overall feedback strength. The unexplained residual in the radiation closure tests is found to be generally within 10 % of the total feedback, no matter which kernel dataset is used. The uncertainty in the TOA feedbacks caused by inter-kernel differences, as measured by the standard deviation of the global mean feedback parameter value, is much smaller than the inter-climate model spread of the feedback values. However, we find relatively larger discrepancies in the surface kernels. The newly generated ERA5 kernel outperforms many other datasets in closing the surface energy budget, achieving a radiation closure comparable to the TOA feedback decomposition, which confirms the validity of the kernel method for the surface radiation budget analysis. In addition, by investigating the ERA5 kernel values computed from the atmospheric states of different years, we notice some apparent interannual differences, which demonstrates the dependence of radiative sensitivities on the mean climate state and partly explains the inter-dataset kernel value differences. In this paper, we provide a detailed description of how ERA5 kernels are generated and considerations to ensure proper use of them in feedback quantifications.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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".