Surface Air Temperature Changes over the Twentieth and Twenty-First Centuries in China Simulated by 20 CMIP5 Models
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Historical temperature variability over China during the twentieth century and projected changes under three emission scenarios for the twenty-first century are evaluated on the basis of a multimodel ensemble of 20 GCMs from phase 5 of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP5) and two observational datasets. Changes relative to phase 3 of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP3) are assessed, and the performance of individual GCMs is also quantified. Compared with observations, GCMs have substantial cold biases over the Tibetan Plateau, especially in the cold season. The timing and location of these biases also correspond to the greatest disagreement among the individual models, indicating GCMs’ limitations in reproducing climatic features in this complex terrain. The CMIP5 multimodel ensemble shows better agreement with observations than CMIP3 in terms of the temperature biases. Both CMIP3 and CMIP5 capture the climatic warming over the twentieth century. However, the magnitude of the annual mean temperature trends is underestimated. There is also limited agreement in the spatial and seasonal patterns of temperature trends over China. Based on six statistical measures, four individual models—the Max Planck Institute Earth System Model, low resolution (MPI-ESM-LR), Second Generation Canadian Earth System Model (CanESM2), Model for Interdisciplinary Research on Climate, Earth System Model (MIROC-ESM), and Community Climate System Model, version 4 (CCSM4)—best represent surface air temperature variability over China. The future temperature projections indicate that the representative concentration pathway (RCP) 8.5 and RCP 4.5 scenarios exhibit a gradual increase in annual temperature during the twenty-first century at a rate of 0.60° and 0.27°C (10 yr)−1, respectively. As the lowest-emission mitigation scenario, RCP 2.6 projects the lowest rate of temperature increase [0.10°C (10 yr)−1]. By the end of the twenty-first century, temperature is projected to increase by 1.7°–5.7°C, with larger warming over northern China and the Tibetan Plateau.
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 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".