pith. sign in

arxiv: 2602.09723 · v2 · pith:P6Z5VUNZnew · submitted 2026-02-10 · 💻 cs.CL

AI-Assisted Scientific Assessment: A Case Study on Climate Change

Christian Buck , Levke Caesar , Michelle Chen Huebscher , Massimiliano Ciaramita , Erich M. Fischer , Zeke Hausfather , \"Ozge Kart Tokmak , Reto Knutti
show 8 more authors
Markus Leippold Joseph Ludescher Katharine J. Mach Sofia Palazzo Corner Kasra Rafiezadeh Shahi Johan Rockstr\"om Joeri Rogelj Boris Sakschewski
This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-21 13:34 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 💻 cs.CL
keywords AI-assisted scientific assessmentclimate changeAMOC stabilityliterature synthesiscollaborative workflowGemini AI
0
0 comments X

The pith

AI-assisted workflows let climate scientists synthesize 79 papers on AMOC stability in just over 46 person-hours.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper tests whether a Gemini-based AI system can integrate into the standard workflow of collaborative scientific assessment on topics where ground truth comes from consensus on existing evidence rather than repeatable tests. Thirteen climate scientists used the system to review literature on the stability of the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation, completing 104 revision cycles across 79 papers. Most AI-generated text was kept in the final report and the tool helped with logical consistency and presentation, yet less than half the content came from AI and expert additions plus oversight were still required to reach rigorous standards.

Core claim

In collaboration with a diverse group of 13 scientists working in the field of climate science, we tested the system on a complex topic: the stability of the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation (AMOC). Our results show that AI can accelerate the scientific workflow. The group produced a comprehensive synthesis of 79 papers through 104 revision cycles in just over 46 person-hours. AI contribution was significant: most AI-generated content was retained in the report. AI also helped maintain logical consistency and presentation quality. However, expert additions were crucial to ensure its acceptability: less than half of the report was produced by AI. Furthermore, substantial oversight

What carries the argument

Gemini-based AI environment integrated into a standard scientific workflow to support iterative revision cycles during collaborative literature synthesis.

If this is right

  • AI can reduce the person-hours needed to produce consensus syntheses of existing evidence.
  • Human experts remain necessary to expand and elevate AI drafts to full scientific standards.
  • AI support improves consistency and presentation even when experts supply the majority of the content.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The same AI-assisted process could shorten assessment timelines for other consensus-based topics such as biodiversity or public health.
  • Retention rate alone may understate AI value if future versions require less human rewriting to reach publishable quality.
  • Measuring downstream use or citation of the resulting report would test whether the time savings translate to broader impact.

Load-bearing premise

That the fraction of AI-generated text retained by the scientists is a reliable indicator of scientific quality rather than a sign of time pressure or group familiarity with the output.

What would settle it

Independent blind review scoring the scientific rigor of high-AI-content sections versus low-AI-content sections in the final report.

read the original abstract

The emerging paradigm of AI co-scientists focuses on tasks characterized by repeatable verification, where agents explore search spaces in 'guess and check' loops. This paradigm does not extend to problems where repeated evaluation is impossible and ground truth is established by the consensus synthesis of theory and existing evidence. We evaluate a Gemini-based AI environment designed to support collaborative scientific assessment, integrated into a standard scientific workflow. In collaboration with a diverse group of 13 scientists working in the field of climate science, we tested the system on a complex topic: the stability of the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation (AMOC). Our results show that AI can accelerate the scientific workflow. The group produced a comprehensive synthesis of 79 papers through 104 revision cycles in just over 46 person-hours. AI contribution was significant: most AI-generated content was retained in the report. AI also helped maintain logical consistency and presentation quality. However, expert additions were crucial to ensure its acceptability: less than half of the report was produced by AI. Furthermore, substantial oversight was required to expand and elevate the content to rigorous scientific standards.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript reports a case study in which a Gemini-based AI system was integrated into a collaborative workflow with 13 climate scientists to synthesize 79 papers on Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation (AMOC) stability. The team completed 104 revision cycles in just over 46 person-hours; most AI-generated content was retained in the final report, although less than half the report originated from AI and expert additions plus substantial oversight were required to reach rigorous standards. The authors conclude that AI can accelerate scientific assessment in domains where ground truth rests on consensus synthesis rather than repeatable verification.

Significance. If the reported retention rates and time metrics hold under independent scrutiny, the work supplies concrete empirical data on AI-assisted synthesis in a consensus-driven field, including specific counts (79 papers, 104 cycles, 46 person-hours) from an actual multi-scientist collaboration. It explicitly acknowledges the necessity of human oversight, which strengthens the practical framing. The single-case observational design and absence of external validation metrics nevertheless constrain generalizability and the strength of the acceleration claim.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract and Results] Abstract and Results: The central claim that 'AI contribution was significant: most AI-generated content was retained' and that 'AI also helped maintain logical consistency' rests on the authors' internal judgment of the 104 revision cycles. No independent blinded expert rating, inter-rater reliability statistic, or comparison of AI versus human sections is reported, rendering retention an unvalidated proxy for scientific quality.
  2. [Discussion] Discussion: The assertion that the workflow was accelerated (79 papers synthesized in 46 person-hours) lacks any historical or control benchmark for the time required to produce an equivalent AMOC synthesis by conventional means. Without such a baseline, the quantitative acceleration claim cannot be evaluated.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Methods] The manuscript should define 'person-hours' more precisely, including how overlapping contributions from the 13 scientists were aggregated and whether preparation time outside the 104 cycles was included.
  2. [Results] A brief table summarizing retention percentages by section (e.g., introduction, methods, conclusions) would improve clarity of the 'most AI-generated content was retained' statement.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their constructive and detailed comments on our manuscript. We address each major comment below in a point-by-point manner, indicating where revisions will be made to improve clarity and acknowledge limitations of the case-study design.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract and Results] Abstract and Results: The central claim that 'AI contribution was significant: most AI-generated content was retained' and that 'AI also helped maintain logical consistency' rests on the authors' internal judgment of the 104 revision cycles. No independent blinded expert rating, inter-rater reliability statistic, or comparison of AI versus human sections is reported, rendering retention an unvalidated proxy for scientific quality.

    Authors: We agree that retention rates derive from the internal collaborative process rather than external validation metrics. The 104 revision cycles were logged in real time by the 13 participating scientists, with each AI draft reviewed for scientific accuracy, logical flow, and relevance before retention or modification. To address the concern, we will expand the Methods section with a detailed description of the revision-tracking protocol, explicit retention criteria, and a breakdown of AI-generated versus expert-added content by section. A separate blinded inter-rater study lies beyond the scope of this observational case study. revision: partial

  2. Referee: [Discussion] Discussion: The assertion that the workflow was accelerated (79 papers synthesized in 46 person-hours) lacks any historical or control benchmark for the time required to produce an equivalent AMOC synthesis by conventional means. Without such a baseline, the quantitative acceleration claim cannot be evaluated.

    Authors: We concur that the absence of a paired control or historical benchmark limits the strength of any quantitative acceleration claim. This manuscript presents an observational case study and reports the actual person-hours recorded during the 13-scientist collaboration. We will revise the Discussion to qualify the acceleration statement, reference the authors' collective prior experience with comparable literature syntheses (which typically require substantially more time), and explicitly call for future controlled comparisons to establish rigorous benchmarks. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: empirical case study reports direct observations

full rationale

The paper is a single-case observational report of an AI-assisted workflow on AMOC stability. It measures concrete quantities (79 papers synthesized, 104 revision cycles, 46 person-hours, retention rates of AI-generated text) and states that expert oversight was required. These are direct empirical counts and qualitative assessments from the process itself, with no equations, fitted parameters, predictions, or derivations that reduce to the inputs by construction. No self-citation chains, uniqueness theorems, or ansatzes are invoked to justify the central claims. The results stand as self-contained descriptions of one workflow instance against the external benchmark of the participating scientists' final report.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the premise that expert scientists can accurately judge the scientific acceptability of AI drafts and that retention rates reflect quality rather than process familiarity. No free parameters or new entities are introduced.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Ground truth in climate assessment is established by consensus synthesis of theory and existing evidence rather than repeatable verification.
    Stated in the opening paragraph of the abstract as the distinction that motivates the study.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5793 in / 1265 out tokens · 65463 ms · 2026-05-21T13:34:43.964873+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

What do these tags mean?
matches
The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports
The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends
The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses
The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts
The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear
Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

89 extracted references · 89 canonical work pages

  1. [7]

    Should AMOC observations continue: how and why?

    E. Frajka-Williams, N. P. Foukal, and G. Danabasoglu, "Should AMOC observations continue: how and why?" *Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences*,

    work page

  2. [10]

    Millennial-Scale Ocean Climate Variability,

    A. H. L. Voelker and J. T. Andrews, "Millennial-Scale Ocean Climate Variability," in *Elsevier eBooks*, 2018. Available: http://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-409548-9.11368-5

    work page doi:10.1016/b978-0-12-409548-9.11368-5 2018

  3. [11]

    Into the Holocene, anatomy of the Younger Dryas cold reversal and preboreal oscillation,

    J. Velay-Vitow, D. Chandan, and W. R. Peltier, "Into the Holocene, anatomy of the Younger Dryas cold reversal and preboreal oscillation," *Scientific Reports*, 2024. Available: http://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-53591-2

    work page doi:10.1038/s41598-024-53591-2 2024

  4. [13]

    Subpolar North Atlantic western boundary density anomalies and the Meridional Overturning Circulation,

    F. Li *et al.*, "Subpolar North Atlantic western boundary density anomalies and the Meridional Overturning Circulation," *Nature Communications*, 2021. Available: http://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-021-23350-2

    work page doi:10.1038/s41467-021-23350-2 2021

  5. [14]

    Observed fingerprint of a weakening Atlantic Ocean overturning circulation,

    L. Caesar, S. Rahmstorf, A. Robinson, G. Feulner, and V. S. Saba, "Observed fingerprint of a weakening Atlantic Ocean overturning circulation," *Nature*, 2018. Available: http://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-018-0006-5

    work page doi:10.1038/s41586-018-0006-5 2018

  6. [20]

    Exceptional twentieth-century slowdown in Atlantic Ocean overturning circulation,

    S. Rahmstorf, J. E. Box, G. Feulner, M. E. Mann, A. Robinson, S. Rutherford, and E. J. Schaffernicht, "Exceptional twentieth-century slowdown in Atlantic Ocean overturning circulation," *Nature Climate Change*, vol. 5, no. 5, pp. 475–480, 2015. Available: http://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate2554

    work page doi:10.1038/nclimate2554 2015

  7. [28]

    Introduction 1.1. Definition and Importance of the AMOC The Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation (AMOC) is a system of ocean currents in the Atlantic Ocean (extending into the South Atlantic) characterized by a northward flow of warm, saline water in the upper layers of the Atlantic, and a southward flow of colder, deeper waters that are part of th...

    work page

  8. [29]

    Assess the physical mechanisms governing the circulation

    work page

  9. [30]

    Critically evaluate the tension between climate model projections (which generally show gradual weaken- ing) and statistical Early Warning Signals (which suggest approaching tipping points)

    work page

  10. [31]

    Assess the risks and vulnerabilities associated with AMOC decline

    work page

  11. [32]

    push” from high northern latitudes and a “pull

    The Physical Science Basis of AMOC Driving Mechanisms The AMOC is sustained by a complex interplay of buoyancy (thermohaline) and mechanical (wind-driven) forcing. While often conceptually framed as a “push” from high northern latitudes and a “pull” from the 37 AI-Assisted Scientific Assessment: A Case Study on Climate Change Southern Ocean, the circulati...

    work page

  12. [33]

    on” or “off

    Evidence for AMOC Variability: Past, Present, and Future Paleoclimatic Evidence of Past Abrupt Changes The primary evidence that the AMOC is a bistable sys- tem—capable of existing in distinct “on” or “off” states—comes from the combination of paleoclimate evidence, theory, and modeling. Paleoclimatic records, including ice cores and marine sediments, are...

    work page 2004

  13. [34]

    tipping point

    The Tipping Point Debate: Conflicting Evidence and Scientific Uncertainties The most contentious aspect of current AMOC science is the existence and proximity to a “tipping point"—a critical threshold at which the system bifurcates from a strong mode (characterized by active overturning and heat transport) to a weak/off mode (where deep water formation is...

    work page 2021

  14. [35]

    tipping point,

    Impacts, Risks, and Vulnerabilities of AMOC Decline The potential decline of the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation (AMOC) poses systemic and severe risks to the climate system, ecosystems, and human societies. Assessing these risks requires distinguishing between the impacts of a gradual slowdown, which has been observed over parts of the instru...

    work page

  15. [36]

    Response Strategies Given the deep uncertainty regarding the proximity of an AMOC tipping point, strategies must prioritize resilience, robustness, and risk avoidance. Strategies for Gradual Weakening 45 AI-Assisted Scientific Assessment: A Case Study on Climate Change • Adaptation to Gradual Change:Strategies for gradual weakening focus on robust adaptat...

    work page

  16. [37]

    However, this interpretation is challenged by hydrographic reconstructions [17],

    Conclusion and Priorities for Research and Assessment Synthesis of Knowledge Multiple lines of observational and proxy evidence suggest that the AMOC may have weakened relative to the mid-20th century [45], [61]. However, this interpretation is challenged by hydrographic reconstructions [17],

    work page

  17. [38]

    warming hole

    and air-sea heat flux inferences [36] which suggest the circulation has remained stable over the last 30 to 90 years. Assessing these conflicting perspectives, while longer-term proxy records [61] suggest a weakening, recent reconstructions based on air-sea heat fluxes [36] and hydrographic data [17], [30] find no decline since the mid-20th century. This ...

    work page

  18. [39]

    Given the catastrophic global impacts of such an event, the inability of current models to rule out this risk necessitates a precautionary approach

    Final Remarks Although the precise attribution of recent weakening is complex and debated [39], [61], [30], the theoretical robustness of AMOC bistability [45], [64] supports the physical plausibility of abrupt collapse. Given the catastrophic global impacts of such an event, the inability of current models to rule out this risk necessitates a precautiona...

    work page

  19. [40]

    Observations, inferences, and mechanisms of the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation: A review,

    M. W. Buckley and J. Marshall, “Observations, inferences, and mechanisms of the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation: A review,” Reviews of Geophysics, 2016. [Online]. Available: http://doi.org/10.1002/2015RG000493

    work page doi:10.1002/2015rg000493 2016

  20. [41]

    The great ocean conveyor,

    W. Broeker, “The great ocean conveyor,” Oceanography, 1991. [Online]. Available: https://tos.org/oceanography/assets/docs/4-2_broecker.pdf

    work page 1991

  21. [42]

    Anthropogenic Carbon Transport Variabil- ity in the Atlantic Ocean Over Three Decades,

    V. Caínzos, A. Velo, F. F. Pérez, and A. Hernández-Guerra, “Anthropogenic Carbon Transport Variabil- ity in the Atlantic Ocean Over Three Decades,” Global Biogeochemical Cycles, 2022. [Online]. Available: http://doi.org/10.1029/2022GB007475

    work page doi:10.1029/2022gb007475 2022

  22. [43]

    Characterisation of Atlantic meridional over- turning hysteresis using Langevin dynamics,

    J. van den Berk, S. Drijfhout, and W. Hazeleger, “Characterisation of Atlantic meridional over- turning hysteresis using Langevin dynamics,” Earth System Dynamics, 2021. [Online]. Available: http://doi.org/10.5194/esd-12-69-2021

    work page doi:10.5194/esd-12-69-2021 2021

  23. [44]

    Climate bifurcation during the last deglaciation?,

    T. M. Lenton, V. Livina, V. Dakos, and M. Scheffer, “Climate bifurcation during the last deglaciation?,” Climate of the past, 2012. [Online]. Available: http://doi.org/10.5194/cp-8-1127-2012

    work page doi:10.5194/cp-8-1127-2012 2012

  24. [45]

    Ocean circulation and climate during the past 120,000 years,

    S. Rahmstorf, “Ocean circulation and climate during the past 120,000 years,” Nature, 2002. [Online]. Available: https://www.nature.com/articles/nature01090

    work page 2002

  25. [46]

    Recent increases in Arctic freshwater flux affects Labrador Sea convec- tion and Atlantic overturning circulation,

    Q. Yang et al., “Recent increases in Arctic freshwater flux affects Labrador Sea convec- tion and Atlantic overturning circulation,” Nature Communications, 2016. [Online]. Available: http://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms10525

    work page doi:10.1038/ncomms10525 2016

  26. [47]

    On the driving processes of the Atlantic meridional overturning circulation,

    T. Kuhlbrodt et al., “On the driving processes of the Atlantic meridional overturning circulation,” Reviews of Geophysics, 2007. [Online]. Available: http://doi.org/10.1029/2004RG000166

    work page doi:10.1029/2004rg000166 2007

  27. [48]

    Mountain ranges favour vigorous Atlantic meridional overturning,

    B. Sinha et al., “Mountain ranges favour vigorous Atlantic meridional overturning,” Geophysical Research Letters, 2011. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1029/2011gl050485

    work page doi:10.1029/2011gl050485 2011

  28. [49]

    Stability of the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation: A Review and Synthesis,

    W. Weijer et al., “Stability of the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation: A Review and Synthesis,” Journal of Geophysical Research Oceans, 2019. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1029/2019jc015083

    work page doi:10.1029/2019jc015083 2019

  29. [50]

    Thermohaline Convection with Two Stable Regimes of Flow,

    H. Stommel, “Thermohaline Convection with Two Stable Regimes of Flow,” Tellus A Dynamic Meteorol- ogy and Oceanography, 1961. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2153-3490.1961.tb00079.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.2153-3490.1961.tb00079.x 1961

  30. [51]

    Should AMOC observations continue: how and 47 AI-Assisted Scientific Assessment: A Case Study on Climate Change why?,

    E. Frajka-Williams, N. P. Foukal, and G. Danabasoglu, “Should AMOC observations continue: how and 47 AI-Assisted Scientific Assessment: A Case Study on Climate Change why?,” Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A Mathematical Physical and Engineering Sciences,

    work page

  31. [52]

    Available: http://doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2022.0195

    [Online]. Available: http://doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2022.0195

    work page doi:10.1098/rsta.2022.0195 2022

  32. [53]

    Modulation of regional carbon uptake by AMOC and alkalinity changes in the subpolar North Atlantic under a warming climate,

    Q. Zhang, T. Ito, and A. Bracco, “Modulation of regional carbon uptake by AMOC and alkalinity changes in the subpolar North Atlantic under a warming climate,” Frontiers in Marine Science, 2024. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.3389/fmars.2024.1304193

    work page doi:10.3389/fmars.2024.1304193 2024

  33. [54]

    North Atlantic Western Boundary Currents Are Intense Dissolved Organic Carbon Streams,

    M. Fontela, F. F. Pérez, H. Mercier, and P. Lherminier, “North Atlantic Western Boundary Currents Are Intense Dissolved Organic Carbon Streams,” Frontiers in Marine Science, 2020. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.3389/fmars.2020.593757

    work page doi:10.3389/fmars.2020.593757 2020

  34. [55]

    Atlantic Deep Water Formation Occurs Primarily in the Iceland Basin and Irminger Sea by Local Buoyancy Forcing,

    T. Petit, M. S. Lozier, S. A. Josey, and S. A. Cunningham, “Atlantic Deep Water Formation Occurs Primarily in the Iceland Basin and Irminger Sea by Local Buoyancy Forcing,” Geophysical Research Letters,

    work page

  35. [56]

    Available: https://doi.org/10.1029/2020gl091028

    [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1029/2020gl091028

    work page doi:10.1029/2020gl091028

  36. [57]

    Towards two decades of Atlantic Ocean mass and heat transports at 26.5°N,

    W. E. Johns et al., “Towards two decades of Atlantic Ocean mass and heat transports at 26.5°N,” Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A Mathematical Physical and Engineering Sciences, 2023. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2022.0188

    work page doi:10.1098/rsta.2022.0188 2023

  37. [58]

    What Can Hydrography Between the New England Slope, Bermuda and Africa Tell us About the Strength of the AMOC Over the Last 90 years?,

    T. Rossby, J. B. Palter, and K. Donohue, “What Can Hydrography Between the New England Slope, Bermuda and Africa Tell us About the Strength of the AMOC Over the Last 90 years?,” Geophysical Research Letters, 2022. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1029/2022gl099173

    work page doi:10.1029/2022gl099173 2022

  38. [59]

    Causal pathway from AMOC to Southern Amazon rainforest indicates stabilising interaction between two climate tipping elements,

    A. Högner et al., “Causal pathway from AMOC to Southern Amazon rainforest indicates stabilising interaction between two climate tipping elements,” Environmental Research Letters, 2025. [Online]. Available: http://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/addb62

    work page doi:10.1088/1748-9326/addb62 2025

  39. [60]

    Millennial-Scale Ocean Climate Variability,

    A. H. L. Voelker and J. T. Andrews, “Millennial-Scale Ocean Climate Variability,” Encyclopedia of Ocean Sciences (Third Edition)", Academic Press, 2018. [Online]. Available: http://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12- 409548-9.11368-5

    work page doi:10.1016/b978-0-12- 2018

  40. [61]

    High-resolution record of Northern Hemi- sphere climate extending into the last interglacial period,

    North Greenland Ice Core Project members, “High-resolution record of Northern Hemi- sphere climate extending into the last interglacial period,” Nature, 2004. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1038/nature02805

    work page doi:10.1038/nature02805 2004

  41. [62]

    Synchronous centennial abrupt events in the ocean and atmosphere during the last deglaciation,

    T. Chen et al., “Synchronous centennial abrupt events in the ocean and atmosphere during the last deglaciation,” Science, 2015. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aac6159

    work page doi:10.1126/science.aac6159 2015

  42. [63]

    Yamagishi, N

    J. Velay-Vitow, D. Chandan, and W. R. Peltier, “Into the Holocene, anatomy of the Younger Dryas cold re- versal and preboreal oscillation,” Scientific Reports, 2024. [Online]. Available: http://doi.org/10.1038/s41598- 024-53591-2

    work page doi:10.1038/s41598- 2024

  43. [64]

    A multi-model assessment of the early last deglaciation (PMIP4 LDv1): a meltwater perspective,

    B. Snoll et al., “A multi-model assessment of the early last deglaciation (PMIP4 LDv1): a meltwater perspective,” Climate of the past, 2024. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.5194/cp-20-789-2024

    work page doi:10.5194/cp-20-789-2024 2024

  44. [65]

    The magnitude and source of meltwater forcing of the 8.2 ka climate event constrained by relative sea-level data from eastern Scotland,

    G. Rush et al., “The magnitude and source of meltwater forcing of the 8.2 ka climate event constrained by relative sea-level data from eastern Scotland,” Quaternary Science Advances, 2023. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.qsa.2023.100119

    work page doi:10.1016/j.qsa.2023.100119 2023

  45. [66]

    Pending recovery in the strength of the meridional overturning circulation at 26°N,

    B. Moat et al., “Pending recovery in the strength of the meridional overturning circulation at 26°N,” Ocean science, 2020. [Online]. Available: http://doi.org/10.5194/os-16-863-2020

    work page doi:10.5194/os-16-863-2020 2020

  46. [67]

    Detectability of an AMOC Decline in Current and Projected Climate Changes,

    D. Lobelle et al., “Detectability of an AMOC Decline in Current and Projected Climate Changes,” Geophysical Research Letters, 2020. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1029/2020gl089974

    work page doi:10.1029/2020gl089974 2020

  47. [68]

    Opportunities for Earth Observation to Inform Risk Management for Ocean Tipping Points,

    R. Wood et al., “Opportunities for Earth Observation to Inform Risk Management for Ocean Tipping Points,” Surveys in Geophysics, 2024. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10712-024-09859-3

    work page doi:10.1007/s10712-024-09859-3 2024

  48. [69]

    Monitoring the Multiple Stages of Climate Tipping Systems from Space: Do the GCOS Essential Climate Variables Meet the Needs?,

    S. Loriani et al., “Monitoring the Multiple Stages of Climate Tipping Systems from Space: Do the GCOS Essential Climate Variables Meet the Needs?,” Surveys in Geophysics, 2025. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10712-024-09866-4

    work page doi:10.1007/s10712-024-09866-4 2025

  49. [70]

    Signal and Noise in the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation at 26°N,

    G. McCarthy et al., “Signal and Noise in the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation at 26°N,” 48 AI-Assisted Scientific Assessment: A Case Study on Climate Change Geophysical Research Letters, 2025. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1029/2025gl115055

    work page doi:10.1029/2025gl115055 2025

  50. [71]

    A 30-year reconstruction of the Atlantic meridional overturning circulation shows no decline,

    E. Worthington et al., “A 30-year reconstruction of the Atlantic meridional overturning circulation shows no decline,” Ocean science, 2021. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.5194/os-17-285-2021 [31]F.Lietal., “SubpolarNorthAtlanticwesternboundarydensityanomaliesandtheMeridionalOverturning Circulation,” Nature Communications, 2021. [Online]. Availabl...

    work page doi:10.5194/os-17-285-2021 2021

  51. [72]

    Estimating the Atlantic overturning at 26°N using satellite altimetry and cable mea- surements,

    E. Frajka-Williams, “Estimating the Atlantic overturning at 26°N using satellite altimetry and cable mea- surements,” Geophysical Research Letters, 2015. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1002/2015gl063220

    work page doi:10.1002/2015gl063220 2015

  52. [73]

    A dynamically based method for estimating the Atlantic meridional overturning circulation at 26°N from satellite altimetry,

    A. Sanchez-Franks, E. Frajka-Williams, B. Moat, and D. Smeed, “A dynamically based method for estimating the Atlantic meridional overturning circulation at 26°N from satellite altimetry,” Ocean science,

    work page

  53. [74]

    Available: https://doi.org/10.5194/os-17-1321-2021

    [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.5194/os-17-1321-2021

    work page doi:10.5194/os-17-1321-2021 2021

  54. [75]

    Gupta, Neereja Sundaresan, Thomas Alexander, Christopher J

    L. Caesar, S. Rahmstorf, A. Robinson, G. Feulner, and V. S. Saba, “Observed fingerprint of a weakening Atlantic Ocean overturning circulation,” Nature, 2018. [Online]. Available: http://doi.org/10.1038/s41586- 018-0006-5

    work page doi:10.1038/s41586- 2018

  55. [76]

    Anomalously weak Labrador Sea convection and Atlantic overturning during the past 150 years,

    D. Thornalley et al., “Anomalously weak Labrador Sea convection and Atlantic overturning during the past 150 years,” Nature, 2018. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-018-0007-4

    work page doi:10.1038/s41586-018-0007-4 2018

  56. [77]

    Life and death of colloidal bonds control the rate-dependent rheology of gels

    J. Terhaar, L. Vogt, and N. P. Foukal, “Atlantic overturning inferred from air-sea heat fluxes indicates no decline since the 1960s,” Nature Communications, 2025. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467- 024-55297-5

    work page doi:10.1038/s41467- 2025

  57. [78]

    AMOC modes linked with distinct North Atlantic deep water formation sites,

    Dima, M., Lohmann, G., Ionita, M. et al., “AMOC modes linked with distinct North Atlantic deep water formation sites,” Clim Dyn, 2022. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-022-06156-w

    work page doi:10.1007/s00382-022-06156-w 2022

  58. [79]

    Observation-based early-warning signals for a collapse of the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation,

    N. Boers, “Observation-based early-warning signals for a collapse of the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation,” Nature Climate Change, 2021. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-021-01097-4

    work page doi:10.1038/s41558-021-01097-4 2021

  59. [80]

    Natural variability has dominated Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation since 1900,

    M. Latif, J. Sun, M. Visbeck, and M. H. Bordbar, “Natural variability has dominated Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation since 1900,” Nature Climate Change, 2022. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-022-01342-4

    work page doi:10.1038/s41558-022-01342-4 1900

  60. [81]

    Can we trust projections of AMOC weakening based on climate models that cannot reproduce the past?,

    G. D. McCarthy and L. Caesar, “Can we trust projections of AMOC weakening based on climate models that cannot reproduce the past?,” Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A Mathematical Physical and Engineering Sciences, 2023. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2022.0193

    work page doi:10.1098/rsta.2022.0193 2023

  61. [82]

    Aerosol-Forced AMOC Changes in CMIP6 Historical Simulations,

    M. Menary et al., “Aerosol-Forced AMOC Changes in CMIP6 Historical Simulations,” Geophysical Research Letters, 2020. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1029/2020gl088166

    work page doi:10.1029/2020gl088166 2020

  62. [83]

    Contrasting internally and externally generated Atlantic Multidecadal Variability and the role for AMOC in CMIP6 historical simulations,

    J. Robson, R. Sutton, M. Menary, and M. W. K. Lai, “Contrasting internally and externally generated Atlantic Multidecadal Variability and the role for AMOC in CMIP6 historical simulations,” Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A Mathematical Physical and Engineering Sciences, 2023. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2022.0194

    work page doi:10.1098/rsta.2022.0194 2023

  63. [84]

    Structural stability changes of the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation,

    Dima, M., Lohmann, G., Nichita, DR. et al., “Structural stability changes of the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation,” npj Clim Atmos Sci, 2025. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41612-025- 00960-x

    work page doi:10.1038/s41612-025- 2025

  64. [85]

    Collapse of the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation in a Strongly Eddying Ocean-Only Model,

    R. M. van Westen, M. Kliphuis, and H. A. Dijkstra, “Collapse of the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation in a Strongly Eddying Ocean-Only Model,” Geophysical Research Letters, 2025. [Online]. Available: http://doi.org/10.1029/2024GL114532

    work page doi:10.1029/2024gl114532 2025

  65. [86]

    Is the Atlantic Overturning Circulation Approaching a Tipping Point?,

    S. Rahmstorf, “Is the Atlantic Overturning Circulation Approaching a Tipping Point?,” Oceanography,

    work page

  66. [87]

    Available: http://doi.org/10.5670/oceanog.2024.501

    [Online]. Available: http://doi.org/10.5670/oceanog.2024.501

    work page doi:10.5670/oceanog.2024.501 2024

  67. [88]

    On the stability of the Atlantic meridional overturn- ing circulation,

    M. Hofmann and S. Rahmstorf, “On the stability of the Atlantic meridional overturn- ing circulation,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 2009. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0909146106

    work page doi:10.1073/pnas.0909146106 2009

  68. [89]

    Slowed Response of Atlantic 49 AI-Assisted Scientific Assessment: A Case Study on Climate Change Meridional Overturning Circulation Not a Robust Signal of Collapse,

    C. Zimmerman, T. J. W. Wagner, E. Maroon, and D. E. McNamara, “Slowed Response of Atlantic 49 AI-Assisted Scientific Assessment: A Case Study on Climate Change Meridional Overturning Circulation Not a Robust Signal of Collapse,” Geophysical Research Letters, 2025. [Online]. Available: http://doi.org/10.1029/2024GL112415

    work page doi:10.1029/2024gl112415 2025

  69. [90]

    Warning of a forthcoming collapse of the Atlantic meridional overturning circulation,

    P. Ditlevsen and S. Ditlevsen, “Warning of a forthcoming collapse of the Atlantic meridional overturning circulation,” Nature Communications, 2023. [Online]. Available: http://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-023-39810-w

    work page doi:10.1038/s41467-023-39810-w 2023

  70. [91]

    Physics-based early warning signal shows that AMOC is on tipping course,

    R. M. van Westen, M. Kliphuis, and H. A. Dijkstra, “Physics-based early warning signal shows that AMOC is on tipping course,” Science Advances, 2024. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.adk1189

    work page doi:10.1126/sciadv.adk1189 2024

  71. [92]

    doi:10.1017/9781009157896 , abstract =

    Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, “Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis,” Cambridge University Press eBooks, 2023. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009157896

    work page doi:10.1017/9781009157896 2021

  72. [93]

    Low variability of the Atlantic Merid- ional Overturning Circulation throughout the Holocene

    L. Gerber, J. Lippold, F. Süfke, O. Valk, P. Testorf, M. Ehnis, S. Tautenhahn, L. Max, C. M. Chiessi, M. Regelous, S. Szidat, O. Friedrich, F. Pöppelmeier, “Low variability of the Atlantic Merid- ional Overturning Circulation throughout the Holocene.” Nat Commun, 2025 [Online]. Available: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12284099/

    work page 2025

  73. [94]

    Slow and soft passage through tipping point of the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation in a changing climate,

    S. Kim, H. Kim, H. A. Dijkstra, and S. An, “Slow and soft passage through tipping point of the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation in a changing climate,” npj Climate and Atmospheric Science, 2022. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41612-022-00236-8

    work page doi:10.1038/s41612-022-00236-8 2022

  74. [95]

    Response of Storm-Related Extreme Sea Level along the U.S. Atlantic Coast to Combined Weather and Climate Forcing,

    J. Yin, S. M. Griffies, M. Winton, M. Zhao, and L. Zanna, “Response of Storm-Related Extreme Sea Level along the U.S. Atlantic Coast to Combined Weather and Climate Forcing,” Journal of Climate, 2020. [Online]. Available: http://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-19-0551.1

    work page doi:10.1175/jcli-d-19-0551.1 2020

  75. [96]

    Global Marine Ecosystem Response to a Strong AMOC Weakening Under Low and High Future Emission Scenarios,

    A. Boot, J. Steenbeek, M. Coll, A. S. von der Heydt, and H. A. Dijkstra, “Global Marine Ecosystem Response to a Strong AMOC Weakening Under Low and High Future Emission Scenarios,” Earth s Future, 2025. [Online]. Available: http://doi.org/10.1029/2024EF004741

    work page doi:10.1029/2024ef004741 2025

  76. [97]

    Impacts of AMOC Collapse on Monsoon Rainfall: A Multi-Model Comparison,

    M. Ben-Yami et al., “Impacts of AMOC Collapse on Monsoon Rainfall: A Multi-Model Comparison,” Earth s Future, 2024. [Online]. Available: http://doi.org/10.1029/2023EF003959

    work page doi:10.1029/2023ef003959 2024

  77. [98]

    Interacting tipping elements increase risk of climate domino effects under global warming,

    N. Wunderling, J. F. Donges, J. Kurths, and R. Winkelmann, “Interacting tipping elements increase risk of climate domino effects under global warming,” Earth System Dynamics, 2021. [Online]. Available: https://esd.copernicus.org/articles/12/601/2021/esd-12-601-2021.pdf

    work page 2021

  78. [99]

    Modelled arable area for Great Britain under different climate and policy scenarios,

    Smith, G. S., Ritchie, P.D.L., “Modelled arable area for Great Britain under different climate and policy scenarios,” NERC Environmental Data Service, 2019. [Online]. Available: http://doi.org/10.5285/e1c1dbcf- 2f37-429b-af19-a730f98600f6

    work page doi:10.5285/e1c1dbcf- 2019

  79. [100]

    Weakening AMOC reduces ocean carbon uptake and increases the social cost of carbon,

    F. Schaumann and E. Alastrué de Asenjo, “Weakening AMOC reduces ocean carbon uptake and increases the social cost of carbon,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 2025. [Online]. Available: http://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2419543122

    work page doi:10.1073/pnas.2419543122 2025

  80. [101]

    Adaptation planning in the context of a weak- ening and possibly collapsing Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation (AMOC),

    R. Biesbroek, M. Haasnoot, K. J. Mach, and A. C. Petersen, “Adaptation planning in the context of a weak- ening and possibly collapsing Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation (AMOC),” Regional Environmental Change, 2025. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10113-025-02434-5

    work page doi:10.1007/s10113-025-02434-5 2025

Showing first 80 references.