MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2538117061 · doi:10.5194/gmd-9-3685-2016

The Detection and Attribution Model Intercomparison Project (DAMIP v1.0)contribution to CMIP6

2016· article· en· W2538117061 on OpenAlexaff
Nathan P. Gillett, Hideo Shiogama, B. Funke, Gabriele C. Hegerl, Reto Knutti, Katja Matthes, Benjamin D. Santer, Dáithí A. Stone, Claudia Tebaldi

Bibliographic record

VenueGeoscientific model development · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAtmospheric and Environmental Gas Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of VictoriaEnvironment and Climate Change Canada
FundersNatural Environment Research CouncilSight Research UK
KeywordsForcing (mathematics)Coupled model intercomparison projectClimatologyEnvironmental scienceClimate changeClimate modelAttributionRadiative forcingMeteorologyAtmospheric sciencesGeographyGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. Detection and attribution (D&A) simulations were important components of CMIP5 and underpinned the climate change detection and attribution assessments of the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. The primary goals of the Detection and Attribution Model Intercomparison Project (DAMIP) are to facilitate improved estimation of the contributions of anthropogenic and natural forcing changes to observed global warming as well as to observed global and regional changes in other climate variables; to contribute to the estimation of how historical emissions have altered and are altering contemporary climate risk; and to facilitate improved observationally constrained projections of future climate change. D&A studies typically require unforced control simulations and historical simulations including all major anthropogenic and natural forcings. Such simulations will be carried out as part of the DECK and the CMIP6 historical simulation. In addition D&A studies require simulations covering the historical period driven by individual forcings or subsets of forcings only: such simulations are proposed here. Key novel features of the experimental design presented here include firstly new historical simulations with aerosols-only, stratospheric-ozone-only, CO2-only, solar-only, and volcanic-only forcing, facilitating an improved estimation of the climate response to individual forcing, secondly future single forcing experiments, allowing observationally constrained projections of future climate change, and thirdly an experimental design which allows models with and without coupled atmospheric chemistry to be compared on an equal footing.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.042

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.002

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.205 · 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

Citations606
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeoscientific model developmentSame topicAtmospheric and Environmental Gas DynamicsFrench-language works237,207