Synthesis of the land carbon fluxes of the Amazon region between 2010 and 2020
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The Amazon is the largest continuous tropical forest in the world and plays a key role in the global carbon cycle. Human-induced disturbances and climate change have impacted the Amazon carbon balance. Here we conduct a comprehensive synthesis of existing state-of-the-art estimates of the contemporary land carbon fluxes in the Amazon using a set of bottom-up methods (i.e., dynamic vegetation models and bookkeeping models) and a top-down inversion (atmospheric inversion model) over the Brazilian Amazon and the whole Biogeographical Amazon domain. Over the whole biogeographical Amazon region bottom-up methodologies suggest a small average carbon sink over 2010-2020, in contrast to a small carbon source simulated by top-down inversion (2010-2018). However, these estimates are not significantly different from one another when accounting for their large individual uncertainties, highlighting remaining knowledge gaps, and the urgent need to reduce such uncertainties. Nevertheless, both methodologies agreed that the Brazilian Amazon has been a net carbon source during recent climate extremes and that the south-eastern Amazon was a net land carbon source over the whole study period (2010-2020). Overall, our results point to increasing human-induced disturbances (deforestation and forest degradation by wildfires) and reduction in the old-growth forest sink during drought.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it