MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Mixed layer depth in the PMIP4 midHolocene simulations: comparison to new proxy data in North Atlantic deep convection regions

2025· article· W4417199692 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Xiner Wu, Anne de Vernal, Paul G. Myers

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Language
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicOceanographic and Atmospheric Processes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaUniversité du Québec à Montréal
FundersFonds de recherche du Québec – Nature et technologiesNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMixed layerLayer (electronics)ConvectionClimate modelDeep convectionProxy (statistics)Mixed phase

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The ocean mixed layer plays an important role in the climate system as it regulates energy fluxes at the ocean-atmosphere interface. Its representation in climate models is thus critical. Here, we evaluate the mixed layer depth (MLD) in 15 coupled global climate models used in the Paleoclimate Modelling Intercomparison Project 4 and compare them against dinocyst-based MLD reconstructions from the subpolar North Atlantic for the mid-Holocene (MH, 6000 years before present). We observe a large spread of MLD response to the MH forcings across the models in the present-day deep-water formation areas, highlighting the importance of model uncertainty. Most models fail to predict the direction of MLD change, and the ensemble mean does not align better with proxy data than individual models. Our analysis also suggests that deep-water formation in the Labrador Sea may be particularly vulnerable under a future scenario of global warming and ice sheet melting.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.058
Threshold uncertainty score0.116

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.061
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.227 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicOceanographic and Atmospheric Processes→French-language works237,207→