MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Land Surface Model influence on the simulated climatologies of extreme temperature and precipitation events within the WRF model over North America

2020· article· en· W3093060652 on OpenAlexaff
Almudena García‐García, Francisco José Cuesta‐Valero, Hugo Beltrami, J. Fidel González‐Rouco, Elena García‐Bustamante, Joel Finnis

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicClimate variability and models
Canadian institutionsSt. Francis Xavier UniversityMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWeather Research and Forecasting ModelPrecipitationClimate modelClimatologyEnvironmental scienceClimate changeAtmospheric sciencesRepresentative Concentration PathwaysMeteorologyGeographyPhysicsEcologyBiologyGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The representation and projection of extreme temperature and precipitation events in climate models are of major importance for developing polices to build communities’ resilience in the face of climate change. However, state-of-the-art global and regional climate model simulations yield a broad inter-model range of intensities, durations and frequencies of these extremes. Here, we present a modeling experiment using the Weather Research and Forecasting (WRF) Regional Climate Model (RCM) to determine the influence of the choice of land surface model (LSM) component on the uncertainty in the simulation of extreme event statistics. First, we evaluate land-atmosphere interactions within four simulations performed with the WRF model coupled to three different LSMs from 1980 to 2012 over North America. Results show regional differences among simulations for the frequency of events when surface conditions are altered by atmospheric forcing or by land surface processes. Second, we find a large inter-model range of extreme statistics across the ensemble of WRF-LSM simulations. This is particularly the case for indices related to the intensity and duration of temperature and precipitation extremes. Regions displaying large uncertainty in the WRF simulation of extreme events are also identified in a model ensemble experiment carried out with three different RCMs participating in the Coordinated Regional Climate Downscaling Experiment (CORDEX) project. This agreement between the model simulations performed in this work and the set of CORDEX simulations suggests that the implications of our results are valid for other model ensembles. This study illustrates the importance of supporting the development of new multi-LSM modeling studies to understand inter-model differences in simulating extreme events, ultimately helping to narrow down the range across climate model projections.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.157
Threshold uncertainty score0.312

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.035
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.204 · 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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicClimate variability and models→French-language works237,207→