MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392457859 · doi:10.5194/tc-18-995-2024

Why is summertime Arctic sea ice drift speed projected to decrease?

2024· article· en· W4392457859 on OpenAlexaff
Jamie L. Ward, Neil F. Tandon

Bibliographic record

Venue˜The œcryosphere · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicArctic and Antarctic ice dynamics
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClimatologyEnvironmental scienceSea iceArcticArctic ice packWind speedCoupled model intercomparison projectGlobal warmingOcean gyreClimate changeMeteorologyClimate modelOceanographyGeologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. Alongside declining Arctic sea ice cover during the satellite era, there have also been positive trends in sea ice Arctic average drift speed (AADS) during both winter and summer. This increasing sea ice motion is an important consideration for marine transportation as well as a potential feedback on the rate of sea ice area decline. Earlier studies have shown that nearly all modern global climate models (GCMs) produce positive March (winter) AADS trends for both the historical period and future warming scenarios. However, most GCMs do not produce positive September (summer) AADS trends during the historical period, and nearly all GCMs project decreases in September AADS with future warming. This study seeks to understand the mechanisms driving these projected summertime AADS decreases using output from 17 models participating in the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project phase 6 (CMIP6) along with 10 runs of the Community Earth System Model version 2 Large Ensemble (CESM2-LE). The CESM2-LE analysis reveals that the projected summertime AADS decreases are due to changes in sea surface height (SSH) and wind stress which act to reduce sea ice motion in the Beaufort Gyre and Transpolar Drift. During March, changes in internal stress and wind stress counteract tilt force changes and produce positive drift speed trends. The simulated wintertime mechanisms are supported by earlier observational studies, which gives confidence that the mechanisms driving summertime projections are likely also at work in the real world. However, the precise strength of these mechanisms is likely not realistic during summer, and additional research is needed to assess whether the simulated summertime internal stress changes are too weak compared to changes in other forces. The projected summertime wind stress changes are associated with reduced sea level pressure north of Greenland, which is expected with the northward shift of the jet streams. The projected summertime SSH changes are primarily due to freshening of the Arctic Ocean (i.e., halosteric expansion), with thermal expansion acting as a secondary contribution. The associated ocean circulation changes lead to additional piling up of water in the Russian shelf regions, which further reinforces the SSH increase. Analysis of CMIP6 output provides preliminary evidence that some combination of wind stress and SSH changes is also responsible for projected AADS decreases in other models, but more work is needed to assess mechanisms in more detail. Altogether, our results motivate additional studies to understand the roles of SSH and wind stress in driving changes in Arctic sea ice motion.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.327
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0190.004

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.210 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations4
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue˜The œcryosphereSame topicArctic and Antarctic ice dynamicsFrench-language works237,207