2012
DOI: 10.1007/s00382-012-1453-6
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A box model of the Arctic natural variability

Abstract: Your article is protected by copyright and all rights are held exclusively by Springer-Verlag. This e-offprint is for personal use only and shall not be self-archived in electronic repositories. If you wish to self-archive your work, please use the accepted author's version for posting to your own website or your institution's repository. You may further deposit the accepted author's version on a funder's repository at a funder's request, provided it is not made publicly available until 12 months after publica… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2014
2014
2014
2014

Publication Types

Select...
1

Relationship

0
1

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 1 publication
(1 citation statement)
references
References 214 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The negative feedback was subsequently detected via statistical analysis of observations (Strong et al 2009) and hybrid statistical-dynamical modeling (Strong and Magnusdottir 2010). In contrast, Ou (2013) proposed that the large-scale sea ice-atmosphere feedback over the Arctic was positive where, for example, negative SLP anomalies resulting from ice removal from the Barents Sea would strengthen the cyclonic circulation over the eastern Arctic, leading to further ice loss through Fram Strait.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 94%
“…The negative feedback was subsequently detected via statistical analysis of observations (Strong et al 2009) and hybrid statistical-dynamical modeling (Strong and Magnusdottir 2010). In contrast, Ou (2013) proposed that the large-scale sea ice-atmosphere feedback over the Arctic was positive where, for example, negative SLP anomalies resulting from ice removal from the Barents Sea would strengthen the cyclonic circulation over the eastern Arctic, leading to further ice loss through Fram Strait.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 94%