MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7099572049

Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics Correlations of mesospheric winds with subtle motion of the Arctic

2013· article· en· W7099572049 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicEvolution and Paleontology Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMesopauseStratospherePolar vortexAirglowSudden stratospheric warmingMesospherePolarVortexArctic
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. This paper investigates the relationship between high latitude upper mesospheric winds and the state of the stratospheric polar vortex in the absence of major sudden stratospheric warmings. A ground based Michelson Interferometer stationed at Resolute Bay (74 ◦ 43 ′ N, 94 ◦ 58 ′ W) in the Canadian High Arctic is used to measure mesopause region neutral winds using the hydroxyl (OH) Meinel-band airglow emission (central altitude of ∼85 km). These observed winds are compared to analysis winds in the upper stratosphere during November and December of 1995 and 1996; years characterized as cold, stable polar vortex periods. Correlation of mesopause wind speeds with those from the upper stratosphere is found to be significant for the 1996 season when the polar vortex is subtly displaced off its initial location by a strong Aleutian High. These mesopause winds are observed to lead stratospheric winds by approximately two days with increasing (decreasing) mesospheric winds predictive of decreasing (increasing) stratospheric winds. No statistically significant correlations are found for the 1995 season when there is no such displacement of the polar vortex. 1

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.064
Threshold uncertainty score0.128

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 communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.171
Teacher spread0.164 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicEvolution and Paleontology StudiesFrench-language works237,207