The Influence of Atmospheric Blocking on Extreme Winter Minimum Temperatures in North America
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Regional climate models (RCMs) are the primary source of high-resolution climate projections, and it is of crucial importance to evaluate their ability to simulate extreme events under current climate conditions. Many extreme events are influenced by circulation features that occur outside, or on the edges of, RCM domains. Thus, it is of interest to know whether such dynamically controlled aspects of extremes are well represented by RCMs. This study assesses the relationship between upstream blocking and cold temperature extremes over North America in observations, reanalysis products (ERA-Interim and NARR), and RCMs (CanRCM4, CRCM5, HIRHAM5, and RCA4). Generalized extreme value distributions were fitted to winter minimum temperature (TNn) incorporating blocking frequency (BF) as a covariate, which is shown to have a significant influence on TNn. The magnitude of blocking influence in the RCMs is consistent with observations, but the spatial extent varies. CRCM5 and HIRHAM5 reproduce the pattern of influence best compared to observations. CanRCM4 and RCA4 capture the influence of blocking in British Columbia and the northeastern United States, but the extension of influence that is seen in observations and reanalysis into the southern United States is not evident. The difference in the 20-yr return value (20RV) of TNn between high and low BF in the Pacific Ocean indicates that blocking is associated with a decrease of up to 15°C in the 20RV over the majority of the United States and in western Canada. In northern North America the difference in the 20RV is positive as blocking is associated with warmer extreme cold temperatures. The 20RVs are generally simulated well by the RCMs.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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 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".