Observed changes in temperature extremes for the Beijing–Tianjin–Hebei region of China
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT As one of the most significant threats facing the world, climate change has already been manifested everywhere in the form of frequent extreme climate events (e.g. heat waves, floods, droughts and wildfires) and has caused serious impacts on all aspects of the living environment. Due to the regional variability of global climate change, understanding the ongoing climatic changes at a local scale is very important for decision makers and resource managers to develop appropriate mitigation and adaptation strategies against the changing climate. In this study, recent changes in extreme temperature indices (including frost days, summer days, icy days, tropical nights, growing season length, cool nights and warm nights, cool days and warm days, and daily temperature range) over the Beijing–Tianjin–Hebei (BTH) region of China were investigated in the context of global warming. The results indicate that the historical trends of these extreme temperature indices are statistically significant in Huailai, Beijing, Leting and Shijiazhuang while no significant trends are reported in Chengde, Tianjin and Cangzhou−Potou. By comparing results between coastal and inland stations, it is found that the changes in temperature extremes in inland stations are less significant than the changes in coastal stations. The results also suggest that the indices based on minimum temperature show decreasing trends while those for maximum temperature present increasing trends. Furthermore, mutation tests were performed for all indices in order to understand when the changes were initiated. An apparent mutation point (mostly in the 1980s) is detected for most of the analysed temperature indices. This may be caused by the wide implementation of the reform and opening policy in the early 1980s to boost economic development in the BTH region.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".