A Synoptic Weather-Typing Approach to Project Future Daily Rainfall and Extremes at Local Scale in Ontario, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This paper attempts to project possible changes in the frequency of daily rainfall events late in this century for four selected river basins (i.e., Grand, Humber, Rideau, and Upper Thames) in Ontario, Canada. To achieve this goal, automated synoptic weather typing as well as cumulative logit and nonlinear regression methods was employed to develop within-weather-type daily rainfall simulation models. In addition, regression-based downscaling was applied to downscale four general circulation model (GCM) simulations to three meteorological stations (i.e., London, Ottawa, and Toronto) within the river basins for all meteorological variables (except rainfall) used in the study. Using downscaled GCM hourly climate data, discriminant function analysis was employed to allocate each future day for two windows of time (2046–65, 2081–2100) into one of the weather types. Future daily rainfall and its extremes were projected by applying within-weather-type rainfall simulation models together with downscaled future GCM climate data. A verification process of model results has been built into the whole exercise (i.e., statistical downscaling, synoptic weather typing, and daily rainfall simulation modeling) to ascertain whether the methods are stable for projection of changes in frequency of future daily rainfall events. Two independent approaches were used to project changes in frequency of daily rainfall events: method I—comparing future and historical frequencies of rainfall-related weather types, and method II—applying daily rainfall simulation models with downscaled future climate information. The increases of future daily rainfall event frequencies and seasonal rainfall totals (April–November) projected by method II are usually greater than those derived by method I. The increase in frequency of future daily heavy rainfall events greater than or equal to 25 mm, derived from both methods, is likely to be greater than that of future daily rainfall events greater than or equal to 0.2 mm: 35%–50% versus 10%–25% over the period 2081–2100 derived from method II. In addition, the return values of annual maximum 3-day accumulated rainfall totals are projected to increase by 20%–50%, 30%–55%, and 25%–60% for the periods 2001–50, 2026–75, and 2051–2100, respectively. Inter-GCM and interscenario uncertainties of future rainfall projections were quantitatively assessed. The intermodel uncertainties are similar to the interscenario uncertainties, for both method I and method II. However, the uncertainties are generally much smaller than the projection of percentage increases in the frequency of future seasonal rain days and future seasonal rainfall totals. The overall mean projected percentage increases are about 2.6 times greater than overall mean intermodel and interscenario uncertainties from method I; the corresponding projected increases from method II are 2.2–3.7 times greater than overall mean uncertainties.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".