Global heat stress on health, wildfires, and agricultural crops under different levels of climate warming
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The effects of heat stress are spatially heterogeneous owing to local variations in climate response, population density, and social conditions. Using global climate and impact models from the Inter-Sectoral Impact Model Intercomparison Project, our analysis shows that the frequency and intensity of heat events increase, especially in tropical regions (geographic perspective) and developing countries (national perspective), even with global warming held to the 1.5 °C target. An additional 0.5 °C increase to the 2 °C warming target leads to >15% of global land area becoming exposed to levels of heat stress that affect human health; almost all countries in Europe will be subject to increased fire danger, with the duration of the fire season lasting 3.3 days longer; 106 countries are projected to experience an increase in the wheat production-damage index. Globally, about 38%, 50%, 46%, 36%, and 48% of the increases in exposure to health threats, wildfire, crop heat stress for soybeans, wheat, and maize could be avoided by constraining global warming to 1.5 °C rather than 2 °C. With high emissions, these impacts will continue to intensify over time, extending to almost all countries by the end of the 21st century: >95% of countries will face exposure to health-related heat stress, with India and Brazil ranked highest for integrated heat-stress exposure. The magnitude of the changes in fire season length and wildfire frequency are projected to increase substantially over 74% global land, with particularly strong effects in the United States, Canada, Brazil, China, Australia, and Russia. Our study should help facilitate climate policies that account for international variations in the heat-related threats posed by climate change.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".