Potential for Regional Resilience to Ocean Warming and Acidification Extremes: Projected Vulnerability Under Contrasting Pathways and Thresholds
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT We analyze the frequency and amplitude of projected warming and ocean acidification extremes under high CO 2 and strongly mitigating scenarios. We find interpretational differences in projections arising from methodological choices associated with specification of stressor thresholds. Use of absolute versus distribution‐based thresholds, and, in the distribution‐based case, the inclusion or exclusion of seasonal variability, can lead to very different regional patterns in projected stress. The choice of fixed versus adaptive baseline, for example, determines whether future stress frequency in the low‐CO 2 scenario most closely resembles that in the high‐emissions scenario or historical period. We find that mitigation through emissions reductions, in combination with representation of rates of adaptation that are realistic for some marine organisms, has the potential to dampen end of century threshold exceedance to frequencies of occurrence closer to the recent historical period than to the high‐emissions scenario.
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 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".