MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

ENSO and NAO Linkage to Strong Volcanism and Associated Post-Volcanic High-latitude Winter Warming

2023· preprint· en· W4384928147 on OpenAlexaff
Muhammad Mubashar Dogar, Masatomo Fujiwara, Ming Zhao, Masamichi Ohba, Yu Kosaka

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicClimate variability and models
Canadian institutionsImpact
FundersJapan Society for the Promotion of ScienceHokkaido University
KeywordsVolcanoVolcanismClimatologyMiddle latitudesGlobal warmingLatitudeGeologyVulcanian eruptionAtmospheric sciencesAtmospheric circulationEl Niño Southern OscillationClimate changeEnvironmental scienceGeochemistryOceanographySeismology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

High-latitude winter warming was observed following strong tropical volcanism, which has long been believed to be due to the volcanic-induced positive NAO phase. However, recent works argue that this warming is caused by ENSO variability. Moreover, controversies exist about the sensitivity of ENSO to volcanism. Therefore, to better resolve the controversies related to post-volcanic ENSO and NAO sensitivity and associated high-latitude winter warming, we conducted ENSO-preconditioned volcanic experiments using GFDL-CM2.1 coupled model. Our simulations strongly suggest that the post-eruption Eurasian winter warming is caused by a post-eruption positive NAO phase and not by coexisting ENSO-preconditioned variability. Additionally, we find that the El Niño-preconditioned volcanic eruption enhances the El Niño phase; however, the neutral and La Niña-preconditioned volcanisms do not lead to ENSO–like response. These findings are helpful to better understand volcanic-induced circulation impacts and have important implications for the interpretation of model results and for post-volcanic prediction.

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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.232 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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