Characterization of Air and Ground Temperature Relationships within the CMIP5 Historical and Future Climate Simulations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The relationships between air and ground surface temperatures across North America are examined in the historical and future projection simulations from 32 general circulation models (GCMs) included in the fifth phase of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP5). The difference between surface air (2 m) and ground surface (10 cm) temperatures is affected by simulated snow cover, vegetation cover, and precipitation by means of changes in soil moisture and soil properties. In winter, the differences between air and ground surface temperatures, for all CMIP5 simulations, are related to the insulating effect of snow cover and soil freezing phenomena. In summer, large leaf area index and large precipitation rates correspond to smaller differences between air and ground temperatures for the majority of simulations, likely due to induced changes in latent and sensible heat fluxes at the ground surface. Our results show that the representation of air‐ground coupling, analyzed using the difference between ground and air surface temperatures as metric, differs from observations, the North American Regional Reanalysis product and among the CMIP5 GCM simulations, by amounts that depend on the employed land surface model. The large variability among GCMs and the marked dependence of the results on the choice of the land surface model illustrate the need for improving the representation of processes controlling the coupling of the lower atmosphere and the land surface in GCMs as a mean of reducing the variability in their representation of weather and climate phenomena.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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".