MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Comment on egusphere-2024-440

2024· peer-review· en· W4392833400 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Basudev Swain, Marco Vountas, Aishwarya Singh, Nidhi L. Anchan, Adrien Deroubaix, Luca Lelli, Yanick Ziegler, Sachin S. Gunthe, John P. Burrows

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepeer-review
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeophysics and Gravity Measurements
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. The central Arctic cryosphere is influenced by the Arctic Amplification (AA) and is warming faster than the lower latitudes. AA affects the formation, loss and transport of aerosols. Efforts to assess the underlying processes determining aerosol variability are currently limited due to the lack of ground-based and space-borne aerosol observations with high spatial coverage in this region. This study addresses the observational gap by making use of total aerosol optical depth (AOD) data sets retrieved by the AEROSNOW algorithm over the vast cryospheric region of the central Arctic during the Arctic spring and summer. GEOS-Chem (GC) simulations combined with AEROSNOW retrieved data are used to investigate the processes controlling aerosol loading and distribution at different temporal and spatial scales. For the first time, an integrated study of AOD over the Arctic cryosphere during sunlight conditions was possible with the AEROSNOW retrieval and GC simulations. The results show that the spatial patterns observed by AEROSNOW differ from those simulated by GC. During spring, which is characterised by long-range transport of anthropogenic aerosols in the Arctic, the GC underestimates the AOD in the vicinity of Alaska. At the same time, it overestimates the AOD along the Bering Strait, Northern Europe, and the Siberian central Arctic sea ice regions, with differences of -12.3 % and 21.7 %, respectively. In contrast, the GC consistently underestimates AOD compared to AEROSNOW in summer, when transport from lower latitudes is insignificant and local natural processes are the dominant source of aerosol, especially north of 70° N. This underestimation is particularly pronounced over the central Arctic sea ice region, where it is -10.6 %. Conversely, the GC tends to overestimate AOD along the Siberian and Greenland marginal sea ice zones by 19.5 %, but underestimates AOD along the Canadian Archipelago by -9.3 %. The differences in summer AOD between AEROSNOW data products and GC simulated AOD highlight the need to integrate improved knowledge of the summer aerosol process into existing models to constrain its effects on cloud condensation nuclei, ice nucleating particles, and any effects on the radiation budget over central Arctic sea ice during the developing AA period.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.454
Threshold uncertainty score0.779

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0160.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.4540.312

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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.220 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGeophysics and Gravity MeasurementsFrench-language works237,207