Future under sea ice light availability and algal bloom timing from CMIP6 model simulations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Arctic sea ice is projected to thin and reduce in extent significantly over the next century. Both sea ice and its overlying snow limit the amount of light that reaches the upper ocean, impacting the phenology of ocean primary productivity. Recent studies using in-situ data and pan-Arctic satellite observations emphasize the influence of current trends in sea ice and snow on the timing of under-ice, or ice residing algal blooms. This analysis is extended here using Climate Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP6) simulations to estimate future changes in under-ice light levels and to explore the driving factors. Under the SSP5-8.5 scenario, CMIP6 models project a significant reduction in sea-ice and snow thickness, causing light thresholds for algal blooms to be reached up to 60 days earlier by 2100 for regions such as the Chukchi Sea at higher latitudes. Areas such as the Labrador Sea at lower latitudes have limited changes due to relatively thinner sea ice and snow thicknesses. While this trend varies spatially and across models, snow thickness is a critical factor in high-latitude regions.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".