{"id":"W2782820487","doi":"10.1175/jcli-d-16-0752.1","title":"Revising Return Periods for Record Events in a Climate Event Attribution Context","year":2018,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Journal of Climate","topic":"Climate variability and models","field":"Environmental Science","cited_by":22,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"ca_institutions":"Impact","funders":"","keywords":"Attribution; Counterfactual thinking; Context (archaeology); Event (particle physics); Econometrics; Computer science; Extreme value theory; Inference; Climate model; Rare events; Variable (mathematics); Climate change; Statistical hypothesis testing; Statistical inference; Sample (material); Climatology; Statistics; Geography; Psychology; Mathematics; Artificial intelligence; Social psychology","routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":false,"invisible_to_affiliation_only":false},"retraction":null,"screen":null,"direct_labels":[],"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.003000624,0.0001444504,0.0003546651,0.00007262743,0.0001704104,0.00002713633,0.0002119297,0.00009581984,0.0007495692],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0002104901,0.0001228678,0.0001936373,0.000179373,0.000104864,0.0004644789,0.0001401518,0.000185648,0.0001197893],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0004258656,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00002069341,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00002955928,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0001828671,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9980082,0.0001248303,0.0008956954,0.0002118698,0.0002831339,0.0004762821],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9989321,0.0001117855,0.000580457,0.0001917687,0.00006728477,0.0001166416],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"observational","study_design_scores_codex":[0.002985161,0.0007715381,0.8774727,0.000278493,0.00004947728,0.00002462076,0.002801714,0.0006183748,0.02386778,0.001122161,0.0009119837,0.08909601],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.01422888,0.006679245,0.613101,0.004052339,0.0003698173,0.000576492,0.001671924,0.05505545,0.007811308,0.02132942,0.2733516,0.001772551],"study_design_candidate":"observational","study_design_consensus":"observational","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.9945035,0.0000505389,0.003085232,0.000775233,0.0005353741,0.0003063366,0.00002844965,0.000009596947,0.0007057252],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9965804,0.0007365395,0.002163561,0.0002747416,0.0001873038,0.000007411982,0.000004436637,0.00001569328,0.00002988227],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.2724396,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.8207257,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"machine_scores":{"provisional":true,"baseline":true,"maturity_gate_passed":false,"score_opus":0.03159498095115112,"score_gpt":0.3113608988530908,"score_spread":0.2797659179019397,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","note":"Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed). Scores rank; they never assert a category."}}