MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2048273455 · doi:10.1175/jcli-d-13-00761.1

Projected Changes in Temperature and Precipitation Extremes in China by the CMIP5 Multimodel Ensembles

2014· article· en· W2048273455 on OpenAlexaff
Botao Zhou, Qiuzi Han Wen, Ying Xu, Lianchun Song, Xuebin Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Climate · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicClimate variability and models
Canadian institutionsEnvironment and Climate Change Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCoupled model intercomparison projectPrecipitationEnvironmental scienceClimatologyRepresentative Concentration PathwaysClimate changeChinaEnsemble averageScale (ratio)Mean radiant temperatureGeneral Circulation ModelClimate extremesAtmospheric sciencesMeteorologyGeographyGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This paper presents projected changes in temperature and precipitation extremes in China by the end of the twenty-first century based on the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project phase 5 (CMIP5) simulations. The temporal changes and their spatial patterns in the Expert Team on Climate Change Detection and Indices (ETCCDI) indices under the RCP4.5 and RCP8.5 emission scenarios are analyzed. Compared to the reference period 1986–2005, substantial changes are projected in temperature and precipitation extremes under both emission scenarios. These changes include a decrease in cold extremes, an increase in warm extremes, and an intensification of precipitation extremes. The intermodel spread in the projection increases with time, with wider spread under RCP8.5 than RCP4.5 for most indices, especially at the subregional scale. The difference in the projected changes under the two RCPs begins to emerge in the 2040s. Analyses based on the mixed-effects analysis of variance (ANOVA) model indicate that by the end of the twenty-first century, at the national scale, the dominant contributor to the projection uncertainty of most temperature-based indices, and some precipitation extremes [including maximum 1-day precipitation (RX1day) and maximum 5-day precipitation (RX5day), and total extremely wet day total amount (R95p)], is the difference in emission scenarios. By the end of the twenty-first century, model uncertainty is the dominant factor at the regional scale and for the other indices. Natural variability can also play very important role.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.038
Threshold uncertainty score0.075

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.231 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations334
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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