2021
DOI: 10.1038/s41561-020-00674-0
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Eleven-year solar cycles over the last millennium revealed by radiocarbon in tree rings

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

19
243
2

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

3
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 141 publications
(282 citation statements)
references
References 58 publications
19
243
2
Order By: Relevance
“…A test using the OxCal Del-ta_R function [27] to test for and to assess whether there is any systematic difference between the Noceto time series (all data, n = 16: Table 3 and model structure in S2 File) and the IntCal20 calibration curve using a neutral prior (0 ± 10 14 C years), indicates no substantive offset: μ~2.2 with σ~5.9/6.0 14 C years across several model runs (and even less, μ~1.2 and σ 5.8/5.9 14 C years, if the analysis excludes the two outliers: see discussion below, so n = 14). This circumstance suggests that the previously observed difference in the Noceto case was largely due to problems with the previous calibration curve measurements and in line with a general observation in several instances that modern AMS 14 C measurements yield 14 C ages that are slightly older than legacy conventional results [25,[34][35][36][37]. The comparison, now, of the modern AMS 14 C age estimates on the Noceto tree-ring samples versus the IntCal20 calibration record largely based on similar technology for the relevant time period removes this issue.…”
Section: Plos Onesupporting
confidence: 66%
“…A test using the OxCal Del-ta_R function [27] to test for and to assess whether there is any systematic difference between the Noceto time series (all data, n = 16: Table 3 and model structure in S2 File) and the IntCal20 calibration curve using a neutral prior (0 ± 10 14 C years), indicates no substantive offset: μ~2.2 with σ~5.9/6.0 14 C years across several model runs (and even less, μ~1.2 and σ 5.8/5.9 14 C years, if the analysis excludes the two outliers: see discussion below, so n = 14). This circumstance suggests that the previously observed difference in the Noceto case was largely due to problems with the previous calibration curve measurements and in line with a general observation in several instances that modern AMS 14 C measurements yield 14 C ages that are slightly older than legacy conventional results [25,[34][35][36][37]. The comparison, now, of the modern AMS 14 C age estimates on the Noceto tree-ring samples versus the IntCal20 calibration record largely based on similar technology for the relevant time period removes this issue.…”
Section: Plos Onesupporting
confidence: 66%
“…The result shows a periodic variation around the Schwabe cycle length over the entire period, which are strongly influenced by the measurement uncertainties for individual tree-rings of about 2‰. Brehm et al (2021) observed that the measurement noise primarily leads to an over-estimation of amplitudes after bandpass filtering. We therefore generated 5,000 synthetic, random datasets around a sinewave of a certain amplitude and cycle length with the same sampling resolution based on the uncertainties of the measurement series to estimate their influence on amplitude and a cycle length.…”
Section: Solar Activity Of the Sixth Millennium Bce: Forerunner Of The Mid-holocenementioning
confidence: 91%
“…The χ 2 values are lower for the new model in all cases. The fit is poorest for the reconstruction based on the decadal values of 14 C. Very recently, new 14 C-based activity measures with annual resolution were published by Brehm et al (2021). An application of our model to the data set of Brehm et al (2021) will be the subject of a separate publication (Usoskin et al 2021).…”
Section: Reconstruction Of the Total And Open Magnetic Fluxmentioning
confidence: 98%