Hunga Tonga–Hunga Ha′apai Volcano Impact Model Observation Comparison (HTHH-MOC) project: experiment protocol and model descriptions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. The 2022 Hunga volcanic eruption injected a significant amount of water vapor and a moderate amount of sulfur dioxide into the stratosphere, causing observable responses in the climate system. We have developed a model–observation comparison project to investigate the evolution of volcanic water and aerosols and their impacts on atmospheric dynamics, chemistry, and climate, using several state-of-the-art chemistry climate models. The project goals are (1) to evaluate the current chemistry–climate models to quantify their performance in comparison to observations and (2) to understand atmospheric responses in the Earth system after this exceptional event and investigate the potential impacts in the projected future. To achieve these goals, we designed specific experiments for direct comparisons to observations, for example from balloons and the Microwave Limb Sounder satellite instrument. Experiment 1 consists of two sets of free-running ensemble experiments from 2022 to 2031: one with fixed sea-surface temperatures and sea ice and one with coupled ocean. These experiments will help to understand the long-term evolution of water vapor and aerosols; quantify HTHH effects on stratospheric and mesospheric temperatures, dynamics, and transport; understand the impact of dynamic changes on ozone chemistry; quantify the net radiative forcings; and evaluate any surface climate impact. Experiment 2 is a nudged-run experiment from 2022 to 2023 using observed meteorology. To allow participation of more climate models with varying complexities of aerosol simulation, we include two sets of simulations in Experiment 2: Experiment 2a is designed for models with internally generated aerosol, while Experiment 2b is designed for models using prescribed aerosol surface area density. This experiment will help to analyze H2O and aerosol evolution, quantify the net radiative forcings, understand the impacts on mid-latitude and polar O3 chemistry, and allow close comparisons with observations.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".