The Role of Soil Moisture–Atmosphere Interaction on Future Hot Spells over North America as Simulated by the Canadian Regional Climate Model (CRCM5)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Soil moisture–atmosphere interactions play a key role in modulating climate variability and extremes. This study investigates how soil moisture–atmosphere coupling may affect future extreme events, particularly the role of projected soil moisture in modulating the frequency and maximum duration of hot spells over North America, using the fifth-generation Canadian Regional Climate Model (CRCM5). With this objective, CRCM5 simulations, driven by two coupled general circulation models (MPI-ESM and CanESM2), are performed with and without soil moisture–atmosphere interactions for current (1981–2010) and future (2071–2100) climates over North America, for representative concentration pathways (RCPs) 4.5 and 8.5. Analysis indicates that, in future climate, the soil moisture–temperature coupling regions, located over the Great Plains in the current climate, will expand farther north, including large parts of central Canada. Results also indicate that soil moisture–atmosphere interactions will play an important role in modulating temperature extremes in the future by contributing more than 50% to the projected increase in hot-spell days over the southern Great Plains and parts of central Canada, especially for the RCP4.5 scenario. This higher contribution of soil moisture–atmosphere interactions to the future increases in hot-spell days for RCP4.5 is related to the fact that the projected decrease in soil moisture caused the soil to remain in a transitional regime between wet and dry state that is conducive to soil moisture–atmosphere coupling. For the RCP8.5 scenario, on the other hand, the future projected soil state over the southern United States and northern Mexico is too dry to have an impact on evapotranspiration and therefore on temperature.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".