MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6955066580 · doi:10.57757/iugg23-3852

Key roles for atmospheric feedback and mesoscale eddies in modelling the AMOC response to enhanced Greenland runoff

2023· article· en· W6955066580 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenuePublication Database GFZ (GFZ German Research Centre for Geosciences) · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicClimate variability and models
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMesoscale meteorologyOcean gyreMeltwaterEddyOcean dynamicsNorth Atlantic Deep WaterNorth Atlantic oscillationClimate modelOcean current

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<!--!introduction!--> To understand and project the implications of enhanced Greenland Ice Sheet mass loss and potential Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation weakening it is necessary to determine and overcome challenges in simulating their complex linkages. We discuss the role of the ocean mean state, subpolar gyre circulation, mesoscale eddies and atmospheric coupling in shaping the response of the subpolar North Atlantic Ocean to enhanced Greenland runoff. A suite of eight dedicated 60 to 100-year long model experiments with and without atmospheric coupling, with eddy processes parameterized and explicitly simulated, and with regular and significantly enlarged Greenland runoff is presented. The important role of an interactive atmosphere stands out as being crucial for limiting the AMOC weakening because its response to ocean changes enables a compensating temperature feedback. Further, explicitly simulating mesoscale dynamics yields a more realistic distribution path of the meltwater along the North American coast and into the wider North Atlantic with implications for coastal sea-level rise projections. Underestimating eddy activity in the Labrador Sea may lead to too little or too slow entrainment of meltwater and lack of stratification in the deep convection regions. In this respect we demonstrate where eddy parameterization works quite successfully and where only high resolution (>1/12˚) yields a realistic ocean response. This underlines the necessity to advance scale-aware eddy parameterizations for next-generation climate models. Paper published in Ocean Science 02/2023: https://os.copernicus.org/articles/19/141/2023/

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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.064

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.334
Teacher spread0.283 · 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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePublication Database GFZ (GFZ German Research Centre for Geosciences)Same topicClimate variability and modelsFrench-language works237,207