Climate projections over CORDEX Africa domain using the fifth-generation Canadian Regional Climate Model (CRCM5)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Following the CORDEX experimental protocol, climate simulations and climate-change projections for Africa were made with the new fifth-generation Canadian Regional Climate Model (CRCM5). The model was driven by two Global Climate Models (GCMs), one developed by the Max - Planck - Institut für Meteorologie and the other by the Canadian Centre for Climate Modelling and Analysis, for the period 1950–2100 under the RCP4.5 emission scenario. The performance of the CRCM5 simulations for current climate is discussed first and compared also with a reanalysis-driven CRCM5 simulation. It is shown that errors in lateral boundary conditions and sea-surface temperature from the GCMs have deleterious consequences on the skill of the CRCM5 at reproducing specific regional climate features such as the West African Monsoon and the annual cycle of precipitation. For other aspects of the African climate however the regional model is able to add value compared to the simulations of the driving GCMs. Climate-change projections for periods until the end of this century are also analysed. All models project a warming throughout the twenty-first century, although the details of the climate changes differ notably between model projections, especially for precipitation changes. It is shown that the climate changes projected by CRCM5 often differ noticeably from those of the driving GCMs.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".