High Values of the Arctic Amplification in the Early Decades of the 21st Century: Causes of Discrepancy by CMIP6 Models Between Observation and Simulation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Arctic Amplification (AA) in the first decade of the 21st century has reached values between 4 and 5, with a subsequent decrease to current values of about 3.6, while the value was from 2 to 3 during the twentieth century. The ensemble mean of the CMIP6 models has difficulty in reproducing the recently observed high values of the AA. In this report, we identify the main reason for this difficulty to be the CMIP6 models overestimate of the mean global temperature trend since about 1990. The largest values of the AA are observed in winter and spring. A sharp AA peak in 1987 spring was caused by a peak in the Arctic temperature trend occurring at the same time as a dip in the trend of mean global temperature. The winter AA has increased almost monotonically since 1990. Dividing the AA between the Arctic land and ocean areas shows that the ocean area makes a larger contribution to the AA. Our future projection of the AA suggests an increasing AA for about the next decade, followed by a slow decrease to about 3.5 in the 2050s.
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 | 0.002 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".