MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4387186382 · doi:10.1029/2023gl103943

Use of Shallow Ice Core Measurements to Evaluate and Constrain 1980–1990 Global Reanalyses of Ice Sheet Precipitation Rates

2023· article· en· W4387186382 on OpenAlexaff
Adam Schneider, Charles S. Zender, Nicole Loeb, Stephen Price

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysical Research Letters · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicCryospheric studies and observations
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
FundersU.S. Department of Energy
KeywordsIce sheetIce coreClimatologyPrecipitationGreenland ice sheetFirnIce-sheet modelFuture sea levelAntarctic ice sheetGeologyEnvironmental scienceAtmospheric sciencesIce streamSea iceCryosphereMeteorologySnowOceanographyGeographyGeomorphology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Sea‐level rise (SLR) projections by Earth System Models (ESMs) depend on ice sheet surface mass balances. Accurate, global atmosphere reanalyses would be ideal for providing equilibrated ice sheet model initial conditions in fully coupled ESM simulations. Here we present the first evaluation of 1980–1990 global reanalysis precipitation over Greenland and Antarctica that uses independent observations of net accumulation rates derived from shallow ice cores. Precipitation distributions from both the European Centre for Medium‐Range Weather Forecast's Reanalysis (ERA5) and the Modern‐Era Retrospective Analysis for Research and Applications (MERRA‐2) are highly correlated with contemporaneous co‐located net accumulation rates from Greenland (r2 > 0.95) and West Antarctica (r2 > 0.7). Three other commonly used reanalyses (WFDE5, CRUNCEP, and GSWP3) exhibit significantly weaker correlations on one or both ice sheets. Our findings imply that ESMs should use ERA5 or MERRA‐2 in data‐forced simulations to validate ice sheet model dynamics and precondition firn for SLR 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 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 score0.064
Threshold uncertainty score0.127

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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

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 head0.267
GPT teacher head0.388
Teacher spread0.121 · 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

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeophysical Research Letters→Same topicCryospheric studies and observations→French-language works237,207→