@techreport{BrodeurMikolaCooketal.2024, type = {Working Paper}, author = {Brodeur, Abel and Mikola, Derek and Cook, Nikolai and Brailey, Thomas and Briggs, Ryan and Gendre, Alexandra de and Dupraz, Yannick and Fiala, Lenka and Gabani, Jacopo and Gauriot, Romain and Haddad, Joanne and Lima, Goncalo and Ankel-Peters, J{\"o}rg and Dreber, Anna and Campbell, Douglas and Kattan, Lamis and Fages, Diego Marino and Mierisch, Fabian and Sun, Pu and Wright, Taylor and Connolly, Marie and Hoces de la Guardia, Fernando and Johannesson, Magnus and Miguel, Edward and Vilhuber, Lars and Abarca, Alejandro and Acharya, Mahesh and Adjisse, Sossou Simplice and Akhtar, Ahwaz and Lizardi, Eduardo Alberto Ramirez and Albrecht, Sabina and Andersen, Synve Nygaard and Andlib, Zubaria and Arrora, Falak and Ash, Thomas and Bacher, Etienne and Bachler, Sebastian and Bacon, F{\´e}lix and Bagues, Manuel and Balogh, Timea and Batmanov, Alisher and Barschkett, Mara and Basdil, B. Kaan and Dower, Jaromneda and Castek, Ondrej and Caviglia-Harris, Jill and Strand, Gabriella Chauca and Chen, Shi and Chzhen, Asya and Chung, Jong and Collins, Jason and Coppock, Alexander and Cordeau, Hugo and Couillard, Ben and Crechet, Jonathan and Crippa, Lorenzo and Cui, Jeanne and Czymara, Christian and Daarstad, Haley and Dao, Danh Chi and Dao, Dong and Schmandt, Marco David and Linde, Astrid de and Melo, Lucas De and Deer, Lachlan and Vera, Micole De and Dimitrova, Velichka and Dollbaum, Jan Fabian and Dollbaum, Jan Matti and Donnelly, Michael and Huynh, Luu Duc Toan and Dumbalska, Tsvetomira and Duncan, Jamie and Duong, Kiet Tuan and Duprey, Thibaut and Dworschak, Christoph and Ellingsrud, Sigmund and Elminejad, Ali and Eissa, Yasmine and Erhart, Andrea and Etingin-Frati, Giulian and Fatemi-Pour, Elaheh and Federice, Alexa and Feld, Jan and Fenig, Guidon and Firouzjaeiangalougah, Mojtaba and Fleisje, Erlend and Fortier-Chouinard, Alexandre and Engel, Julia Francesca and Fries, Tilman and Fortier, Reid and Fr{\´e}chet, Nadjim and Galipeau, Thomas and Gallegos, Sebasti{\´a}n and Gangji, Areez and Gao, Xiaoying and Garnache, Clo{\´e} and G{\´a}sp{\´a}r, Attila and Gavrilova, Evelina and Ghosh, Arijit and Gibney, Garreth and Gibson, Grant and Godager, Geir and Goff, Leonard and Gong, Da and Gonz{\´a}lez, Javier and Gretton, Jeremy and Griffa, Cristina and Grigoryeva, Idaliya and Grtting, Maja and Guntermann, Eric and Guo, Jiaqi and Gugushvili, Alexi and Habibnia, Hooman and H{\"a}ffner, Sonja and Hall, Jonathan D. and Hammar, Olle and Kordt, Amund Hanson and Hashimoto, Barry and Hartley, Jonathan S. and Hausladen, Carina I. and Havr{\´a}nek, Tom{\´a}š and Hazen, Jacob and He, Harry and Hepplewhite, Matthew and Herrera-Rodriguez, Mario and Heuer, Felix and Heyes, Anthony and Ho, Anson T. Y. and Holmes, Jonathan and Holzknecht, Armando and Hsu, Yu-Hsiang Dexter and Hu, Shiang-Hung and Huang, Yu-Shiuan and Huebener, Mathias and Huber, Christoph and Huynh, Kim P. and Irsova, Zuzana and Isler, Ozan and Jakobsson, Niklas and Frith, Michael James and Jananji, Rapha{\"e}l and Jayalath, Tharaka A. and Jetter, Michael and John, Jenny and Forshaw, Rachel Joy and Juan, Felipe and Kadriu, Valon and Karim, Sunny and Kelly, Edmund and Dang, Duy Khanh Hoang and Khushboo, Tazia and Kim, Jin and Kjellsson, Gustav and Kjelsrud, Anders and Kotsadam, Andreas and Korpershoek, Jori and Krashinsky, Lewis and Kundu, Suranjana and Kustov, Alexander and Lalayev, Nurlan and Langlois, Audr{\´e}e and Laufer, Jill and Lee-Whiting, Blake and Leibing, Andreas and Lenz, Gabriel and Levin, Joel and Li, Peng and Li, Tongzhe and Lin, Yuchen and Listo, Ariel and Liu, Dan and Lu, Xuewen and Lukmanova, Elvina and Luscombe, Alex and Lusher, Lester R. and Lyu, Ke and Ma, Hai and M{\"a}der, Nicolas and Makate, Clifton and Malmberg, Alice and Maitra, Adit and Mandas, Marco and Marcus, Jan and Margaryan, Shushanik and M{\´a}rk, Lili and Martignano, Andres and Marsh, Abigail and Masetto, Isabella and McCanny, Anthony and McManus, Emma and McWay, Ryan and Metson, Lennard and Kinge, Jonas Minet and Mishra, Sumit and Mohnen, Myra and M{\"o}ller, Jakob and Montambeault, Rosalie and Montpetit, S{\´e}bastien and Morin, Louis-Philippe and Morris, Todd and Moser, Scott and Motoki, Fabio and Muehlenbachs, Lucija and Musulan, Andreea and Musumeci, Marco and Nabin, Munirul and Nchare, Karim and Neubauer, Florian and Nguyen, Quan M. P. and Nguyen, Tuan and Nguyen-Tien, Viet and Niazi, Ali and Nikolaishvili, Giorgi and Nordstrom, Ardyn and N{\"u}, Patrick and Odermatt, Angela and Olson, Matt and ien, Henning and {\"O}lkers, Tim and Vert, Miquel Oliver i. and Oral, Emre and Oswald, Christian and Ousman, Ali and {\"O}zak, {\"O}mer and Pandey, Shubham and Pavlov, Alexandre and Pelli, Martino and Penheiro, Romeo and Park, RyuGyung and Martel, Eva P{\´e}rez and Petrovičov{\´a}, Tereza and Phan, Linh and Prettyman, Alexa and Proch{\´a}zka, Jakub and Putri, Aqila and Quandt, Julian and Qiu, Kangyu and Nguyen, Loan Quynh Thi and Rahman, Andaleeb and Rea, Carson H. and Reiremo, Adam and Ren{\´e}e, La{\"e}titia and Richardson, Joseph and Rivers, Nicholas and Rodrigues, Bruno and Roelofs, William and Roemer, Tobias and Rogeberg, Ole and Rose, Julian and Roskos-Ewoldsen, Andrew and Rosmer, Paul and Sabada, Barbara and Saberian, Soodeh and Salamanca, Nicolas and Sator, Georg and Sawyer, Antoine and Scates, Daniel and Schl{\"u}ter, Elmar and Sells, Cameron and Sen, Sharmi and Sethi, Ritika and Shcherbiak, Anna and Sogaolu, Moyosore and Soosalu, Matt and Srensen, Erik and Sovani, Manali and Spencer, Noah and Staubli, Stefan and Stans, Renske and Stewart, Anya and Stips, Felix and Stockley, Kieran and Strobel, Stephenson and Struby, Ethan and Tang, John and Tanrisever, Idil and Yang, Thomas Tao and Tastan, Ipek and Tatić, Dejan and Tatlow, Benjamin and Seuyong, F{\´e}raud Tchuisseu and Th{\´e}riault, R{\´e}mi and Thivierge, Vincent and Tian, Wenjie and Toma, Filip-Mihai and Totarelli, Maddalena and Tran, Van-Anh and Truong, Hung and Tsoy, Nikita and Tuzcuoglu, Kerem and Ubfal, Diego and Villalobos, Laura and Walterskirchen, Julian and Wang, Joseph Taoyi and Wattal, Vasudha and Webb, Matthew D. and Weber, Bryan and Weisser, Reinhard and Weng, Wei-Chien and Westheide, Christian and White, Kimberly and Winter, Jacob and Wochner, Timo and Woerman, Matt and Wong, Jared and Woodard, Ritchie and Wroński, Marcin and Yazbeck, Myra and Yang, Gustav Chung and Yap, Luther and Yassin, Kareman and Ye, Hao and Yoon, Jin Young and Yurris, Chris and Zahra, Tahreen and Zaneva, Mirela and Zayat, Aline and Zhang, Jonathan and Zhao, Ziwei and Yaolang, Zhong}, title = {Mass reproducibility and replicability}, series = {I4R discussion paper series}, journal = {I4R discussion paper series}, number = {107}, publisher = {Institute for Replication}, address = {Essen}, issn = {2752-1931}, pages = {250}, year = {2024}, abstract = {This study pushes our understanding of research reliability by reproducing and replicating claims from 110 papers in leading economic and political science journals. The analysis involves computational reproducibility checks and robustness assessments. It reveals several patterns. First, we uncover a high rate of fully computationally reproducible results (over 85\%). Second, excluding minor issues like missing packages or broken pathways, we uncover coding errors for about 25\% of studies, with some studies containing multiple errors. Third, we test the robustness of the results to 5,511 re-analyses. We find a robustness reproducibility of about 70\%. Robustness reproducibility rates are relatively higher for re-analyses that introduce new data and lower for re-analyses that change the sample or the definition of the dependent variable. Fourth, 52\% of re-analysis effect size estimates are smaller than the original published estimates and the average statistical significance of a re-analysis is 77\% of the original. Lastly, we rely on six teams of researchers working independently to answer eight additional research questions on the determinants of robustness reproducibility. Most teams find a negative relationship between replicators' experience and reproducibility, while finding no relationship between reproducibility and the provision of intermediate or even raw data combined with the necessary cleaning codes.}, language = {en} } @article{SramaAhrensAltobellietal.2004, author = {Srama, Ralf and Ahrens, Thomas J. and Altobelli, Nicolas and Auer, S. and Bradley, J. G. and Burton, M. and Dikarev, V. V. and Economou, T. and Fechtig, Hugo and G{\"o}rlich, M. and Grande, M. and Graps, Amara and Gr{\"u}n, Eberhard and Havnes, Ove and Helfert, Stefan and Horanyi, Mihaly and Igenbergs, E. and Jessberger, Elmar K. and Johnson, T. V. and Kempf, Sascha and Krivov, Alexander v. and Kr{\"u}ger, Harald and Mocker-Ahlreep, Anna and Moragas-Klostermeyer, Georg and Lamy, Philippe and Landgraf, Markus and Linkert, Dietmar and Linkert, G. and Lura, F. and McDonnell, J. A. M. and Moehlmann, Dirk and Morfill, Gregory E. and Muller, M. and Roy, M. and Schafer, G. and Schlotzhauer, G. and Schwehm, Gerhard H. and Spahn, Frank and St{\"u}big, M. and Svestka, Jiri and Tschernjawski, V}, title = {The Cassini Cosmic Dust Analyzer}, issn = {0038-6308}, year = {2004}, abstract = {The Cassini-Huygens Cosmic Dust Analyzer (CDA) is intended to provide direct observations of dust grains with masses between 10(-19) and 10(-9) kg in interplanetary space and in the jovian and saturnian systems, to investigate their physical, chemical and dynamical properties as functions of the distances to the Sun, to Jupiter and to Saturn and its satellites and rings, to study their interaction with the saturnian rings, satellites and magnetosphere. Chemical composition of interplanetary meteoroids will be compared with asteroidal and cometary dust, as well as with Saturn dust, ejecta from rings and satellites. Ring and satellites phenomena which might be effects of meteoroid impacts will be compared with the interplanetary dust environment. Electrical charges of particulate matter in the magnetosphere and its consequences will be studied, e.g. the effects of the ambient plasma and the magnetic held on the trajectories of dust particles as well as fragmentation of particles due to electrostatic disruption. The investigation will be performed with an instrument that measures the mass, composition, electric charge, speed, and flight direction of individual dust particles. It is a highly reliable and versatile instrument with a mass sensitivity 106 times higher than that of the Pioneer 10 and I I dust detectors which measured dust in the saturnian system. The Cosmic Dust Analyzer has significant inheritance from former space instrumentation developed for the VEGA, Giotto, Galileo, and Ulysses missions. It will reliably measure impacts from as low as I impact per month up to 104 impacts per second. The instrument weighs 17 kg and consumes 12 W, the integrated time-of-flight mass spectrometer has a mass resolution of up to 50. The nominal data transmission rate is 524 bits/s and varies between 50 and 4192 bps}, language = {en} } @article{BrzezinkaAltmannCzesnicketal.2016, author = {Brzezinka, Krzysztof and Altmann, Simone and Czesnick, Hj{\"o}rdis and Nicolas, Philippe and Gorka, Michal and Benke, Eileen and Kabelitz, Tina and J{\"a}hne, Felix and Graf, Alexander and Kappel, Christian and B{\"a}urle, Isabel}, title = {Arabidopsis FORGETTER1 mediates stress-induced chromatin memory through nucleosome remodeling}, series = {eLife}, volume = {5}, journal = {eLife}, publisher = {eLife Sciences Publications}, address = {Cambridge}, issn = {2050-084X}, doi = {10.7554/eLife.17061}, pages = {23}, year = {2016}, abstract = {Plants as sessile organisms can adapt to environmental stress to mitigate its adverse effects. As part of such adaptation they maintain an active memory of heat stress for several days that promotes a more efficient response to recurring stress. We show that this heat stress memory requires the activity of the FORGETTER1 (FGT1) locus, with fgt1 mutants displaying reduced maintenance of heat-induced gene expression. FGT1 encodes the Arabidopsis thaliana orthologue of Strawberry notch (Sno), and the protein globally associates with the promoter regions of actively expressed genes in a heat-dependent fashion. FGT1 interacts with chromatin remodelers of the SWI/ SNF and ISWI families, which also display reduced heat stress memory. Genomic targets of the BRM remodeler overlap significantly with FGT1 targets. Accordingly, nucleosome dynamics at loci with altered maintenance of heat-induced expression are affected in fgt1. Together, our results suggest that by modulating nucleosome occupancy, FGT1 mediates stress-induced chromatin memory.}, language = {en} } @article{NicolasLecourieuxKappeletal.2014, author = {Nicolas, Philippe and Lecourieux, David and Kappel, Christian and Cluzet, Stephanie and Cramer, Grant and Delrot, Serge and Lecourieux, Fatma}, title = {The basic leucine zipper transcription factor abscisic acid responseelement-binding factor 2 is an important transcriptional regulator ofabscisic acid-dependent grape berry ripening processes}, series = {Plant physiology : an international journal devoted to physiology, biochemistry, cellular and molecular biology, biophysics and environmental biology of plants}, volume = {164}, journal = {Plant physiology : an international journal devoted to physiology, biochemistry, cellular and molecular biology, biophysics and environmental biology of plants}, number = {1}, publisher = {American Society of Plant Physiologists}, address = {Rockville}, issn = {0032-0889}, doi = {10.1104/pp.113.231977}, pages = {365 -- 383}, year = {2014}, abstract = {In grape (Vitis vinifera), abscisic acid (ABA) accumulates during fruit ripening and is thought to play a pivotal role in this process, but the molecular basis of this control is poorly understood. This work characterizes ABSCISIC ACID RESPONSE ELEMENT-BINDING FACTOR2 (VvABF2), a grape basic leucine zipper transcription factor belonging to a phylogenetic subgroup previously shown to be involved in ABA and abiotic stress signaling in other plant species. VvABF2 transcripts mainly accumulated in the berry, from the onset of ripening to the harvesting stage, and were up-regulated by ABA. Microarray analysis of transgenic grape cells overexpressing VvABF2 showed that this transcription factor up-regulates and/or modifies existing networks related to ABA responses. In addition, grape cells overexpressing VvABF2 exhibited enhanced responses to ABA treatment compared with control cells. Among the VvABF2-mediated responses highlighted in this study, the synthesis of phenolic compounds and cell wall softening were the most strongly affected. VvABF2 overexpression strongly increased the accumulation of stilbenes that play a role in plant defense and human health (resveratrol and piceid). In addition, the firmness of fruits from tomato (Solanum lycopersicum) plants overexpressing VvABF2 was strongly reduced. These data indicate that VvABF2 is an important transcriptional regulator of ABA-dependent grape berry ripening.}, language = {en} } @article{LeloupArnaudSobeletal.2005, author = {Leloup, Philippe-Herv{\´e} and Arnaud, Nicolas and Sobel, Edward and Lacassin, R.}, title = {Alpine thermal and structural evolution of the highest external crystalline massif : the Mont Blanc}, issn = {0278-7407}, year = {2005}, abstract = {The alpine structural evolution of the Mont Blanc, highest point of the Alps (4810 m), and of the surrounding area has been reexamined. The Mont Blanc and the Aiguilles Rouges external crystalline massifs are windows of Variscan basement within the Penninic and Helvetic nappes. New structural, Ar-40/Ar-39, and fission track data combined with a compilation of earlier P-T estimates and geochronological data give constraints on the amount and timing of the Mont Blanc and Aiguilles Rouges massifs exhumation. Alpine exhumation of the Aiguilles Rouges was limited to the thickness of the overlying nappes (similar to 10 km), while rocks now outcropping in the Mont Blanc have been exhumed from 15 to 20 km depth. Uplift of the two massifs started similar to 22 Myr ago, probably above an incipient thrust: the Alpine sole thrust. At similar to 12 Ma, the NE-SW trending Mont Blanc shear zone (MBsz) initiated. It is a major steep reverse fault with a dextral component, whose existence has been overlooked by most authors, that brings the Mont Blanc above the Aiguilles Rouges. Total vertical throw on the MBsz is estimated to be between 4 and 8 km. Fission track data suggest that relative motion between the Aiguilles Rouges and the Mont Blanc stopped similar to 4 Myr ago. Since that time, uplift of the Mont Blanc has mostly taken place along the Mont Blanc back thrust, a steep north dipping fault bounding the southern flank of the range. The "European roof'' is located where the back thrust intersects the MBsz. Uplift of the Mont Blanc and Aiguilles Rouges occurred toward the end of motion on the Helvetic basal decollement (HBD) at the base of the Helvetic nappes but is coeval with the Jura thin-skinned belt. Northwestward thrusting and uplift of the external crystalline massifs above the Alpine sole thrust deformed the overlying Helvetic nappes and formed a backstop, inducing the formation of the Jura arc. In that part of the external Alps, similar to NW-SE shortening with minor dextral NE-SW motions appears to have been continuous from similar to 22 Ma until at least similar to 4 Ma but may be still active today. A sequential history of the alpine structural evolution of the units now outcropping NW of the Pennine thrust is proposed}, language = {en} } @article{BeauvalTasanLaurendeauetal.2012, author = {Beauval, Celine and Tasan, Hilal and Laurendeau, Aurore and Delavaud, Elise and Cotton, Fabrice and Gueguen, Philippe and K{\"u}hn, Nicolas}, title = {On the testing of ground-motion prediction equations against small-magnitude data}, series = {Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America}, volume = {102}, journal = {Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America}, number = {5}, publisher = {Seismological Society of America}, address = {El Cerrito}, issn = {0037-1106}, doi = {10.1785/0120110271}, pages = {1994 -- 2007}, year = {2012}, abstract = {Ground-motion prediction equations (GMPE) are essential in probabilistic seismic hazard studies for estimating the ground motions generated by the seismic sources. In low-seismicity regions, only weak motions are available during the lifetime of accelerometric networks, and the equations selected for the probabilistic studies are usually models established from foreign data. Although most GMPEs have been developed for magnitudes 5 and above, the minimum magnitude often used in probabilistic studies in low-seismicity regions is smaller. Disaggregations have shown that, at return periods of engineering interest, magnitudes less than 5 may be contributing to the hazard. This paper presents the testing of several GMPEs selected in current international and national probabilistic projects against weak motions recorded in France (191 recordings with source-site distances up to 300 km, 3:8 <= M-w <= 4:5). The method is based on the log-likelihood value proposed by Scherbaum et al. (2009). The best-fitting models (approximately 2:5 <= LLH <= 3:5) over the whole frequency range are the Cauzzi and Faccioli (2008), Akkar and Bommer (2010), and Abrahamson and Silva (2008) models. No significant regional variation of ground motions is highlighted, and the magnitude scaling could be the predominant factor in the control of ground-motion amplitudes. Furthermore, we take advantage of a rich Japanese dataset to run tests on randomly selected low-magnitude subsets, and confirm that a dataset of similar to 190 observations, the same size as the French dataset, is large enough to obtain stable LLH estimates. Additionally we perform the tests against larger magnitudes (5-7) from the Japanese dataset. The ranking of models is partially modified, indicating a magnitude scaling effect for some of the models, and showing that extrapolating testing results obtained from low-magnitude ranges to higher magnitude ranges is not straightforward.}, language = {en} } @article{SeroussiNowickiPayneetal.2020, author = {Seroussi, Helene and Nowicki, Sophie and Payne, Antony J. and Goelzer, Heiko and Lipscomb, William H. and Abe-Ouchi, Ayako and Agosta, Cecile and Albrecht, Torsten and Asay-Davis, Xylar and Barthel, Alice and Calov, Reinhard and Cullather, Richard and Dumas, Christophe and Galton-Fenzi, Benjamin K. and Gladstone, Rupert and Golledge, Nicholas R. and Gregory, Jonathan M. and Greve, Ralf and Hattermann, Tore and Hoffman, Matthew J. and Humbert, Angelika and Huybrechts, Philippe and Jourdain, Nicolas C. and Kleiner, Thomas and Larour, Eric and Leguy, Gunter R. and Lowry, Daniel P. and Little, Chistopher M. and Morlighem, Mathieu and Pattyn, Frank and Pelle, Tyler and Price, Stephen F. and Quiquet, Aurelien and Reese, Ronja and Schlegel, Nicole-Jeanne and Shepherd, Andrew and Simon, Erika and Smith, Robin S. and Straneo, Fiammetta and Sun, Sainan and Trusel, Luke D. and Van Breedam, Jonas and van de Wal, Roderik S. W. and Winkelmann, Ricarda and Zhao, Chen and Zhang, Tong and Zwinger, Thomas}, title = {ISMIP6 Antarctica}, series = {The Cryosphere : TC ; an interactive open access journal of the European Geosciences Union}, volume = {14}, journal = {The Cryosphere : TC ; an interactive open access journal of the European Geosciences Union}, number = {9}, publisher = {Copernicus}, address = {G{\"o}ttingen}, issn = {1994-0416}, doi = {10.5194/tc-14-3033-2020}, pages = {3033 -- 3070}, year = {2020}, abstract = {Ice flow models of the Antarctic ice sheet are commonly used to simulate its future evolution in response to different climate scenarios and assess the mass loss that would contribute to future sea level rise. However, there is currently no consensus on estimates of the future mass balance of the ice sheet, primarily because of differences in the representation of physical processes, forcings employed and initial states of ice sheet models. This study presents results from ice flow model simulations from 13 international groups focusing on the evolution of the Antarctic ice sheet during the period 2015-2100 as part of the Ice Sheet Model Intercomparison for CMIP6 (ISMIP6). They are forced with outputs from a subset of models from the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 5 (CMIP5), representative of the spread in climate model results. Simulations of the Antarctic ice sheet contribution to sea level rise in response to increased warming during this period varies between 7:8 and 30.0 cm of sea level equivalent (SLE) under Representative Concentration Pathway (RCP) 8.5 scenario forcing. These numbers are relative to a control experiment with constant climate conditions and should therefore be added to the mass loss contribution under climate conditions similar to present-day conditions over the same period. The simulated evolution of the West Antarctic ice sheet varies widely among models, with an overall mass loss, up to 18.0 cm SLE, in response to changes in oceanic conditions. East Antarctica mass change varies between 6 :1 and 8.3 cm SLE in the simulations, with a significant increase in surface mass balance outweighing the increased ice discharge under most RCP 8.5 scenario forcings. The inclusion of ice shelf collapse, here assumed to be caused by large amounts of liquid water ponding at the surface of ice shelves, yields an additional simulated mass loss of 28mm compared to simulations without ice shelf collapse. The largest sources of uncertainty come from the climate forcing, the ocean-induced melt rates, the calibration of these melt rates based on oceanic conditions taken outside of ice shelf cavities and the ice sheet dynamic response to these oceanic changes. Results under RCP 2.6 scenario based on two CMIP5 climate models show an additional mass loss of 0 and 3 cm of SLE on average compared to simulations done under present-day conditions for the two CMIP5 forcings used and display limited mass gain in East Antarctica.}, language = {en} }