MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400947778 · doi:10.1029/2024jd041296

Evolution of the Climate Forcing During the Two Years After the Hunga Tonga‐Hunga Ha'apai Eruption

2024· article· en· W4400947778 on OpenAlexafffund
M. R. Schoeberl, Yi Wang, Ghassan Taha, Daniel Zawada, Rei Ueyama, A. E. Dessler

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Geophysical Research Atmospheres · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicClimate variability and models
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersCanadian Space AgencyNuclear Safety and Security CommissionNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
KeywordsClimatologyForcing (mathematics)GeographyEnvironmental scienceGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We calculate the climate forcing for the 2 ys after the 15 January 2022, Hunga Tonga‐Hunga Ha'apai (Hunga) eruption. We use satellite observations of stratospheric aerosols, trace gases and temperatures to compute the tropopause radiative flux changes relative to climatology. Overall, the net downward radiative flux decreased compared to climatology. The Hunga stratospheric water vapor anomaly initially increases the downward infrared radiative flux, but this forcing diminishes as the anomaly disperses. The Hunga aerosols cause a solar flux reduction that dominates the net flux change over most of the 2 yrs period. Hunga induced temperature changes produce a decrease in downward long‐wave flux. Hunga induced ozone reduction increases the short‐wave downward flux creating small sub‐tropical increase in total flux from mid‐2022 to 2023. By the end of 2023, most of the Hunga induced radiative forcing changes have disappeared. There is some disagreement in the satellite measured stratospheric aerosol optical depth (SAOD) observations which we view as a measure of the uncertainty; however, the SAOD uncertainty does not alter our conclusion that, overall, aerosols dominate the radiative flux changes.

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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.075
Threshold uncertainty score0.148

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.289 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations32
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Geophysical Research AtmospheresSame topicClimate variability and modelsFrench-language works237,207