MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1985543576 · doi:10.1175/jcli-d-14-00821.1

Human Influences on Changes in the Temperature Seasonality in Mid- to High-Latitude Land Areas

2015· article· en· W1985543576 on OpenAlexaff
Cheng Qian, Xuebin Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Climate · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicClimate variability and models
Canadian institutionsEnvironment and Climate Change Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCoupled model intercomparison projectClimatologyForcing (mathematics)SeasonalityLatitudeNorthern HemisphereEnvironmental scienceMediterranean climateSouthern HemisphereTropicsClimate modelAnnual cycleClimate changeAtmospheric sciencesGeographyEcologyGeologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The annual cycle is the largest variability for many climate variables outside the tropics. Whether human activities have affected the annual cycle at the regional scale is unclear. In this study, long-term changes in the amplitude of surface air temperature annual cycle in the observations are compared with those simulated by the climate models participating in phase 5 of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP5). Different spatial domains ranging from hemispheric to subcontinental scales in mid- to high-latitude land areas for the period 1950–2005 are considered. Both the optimal fingerprinting and a nonoptimal detection and attribution technique are used. The results show that the space–time pattern of model-simulated responses to the combined effect of anthropogenic and natural forcings is consistent with the observed changes. In particular, models capture not only the decrease in the temperature seasonality in the northern high latitudes and East Asia, but also the increase in the Mediterranean region. A human influence on the weakening in the temperature seasonality in the Northern Hemisphere is detected, particularly in the high latitudes (50°–70°N) where the influence of the anthropogenic forcing can be separated from that of the natural forcing.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.052
Threshold uncertainty score0.462

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.036
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.268 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations76
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of ClimateSame topicClimate variability and modelsFrench-language works237,207