Relative Importance of Internal Climate Variability versus Anthropogenic Climate Change in Global Climate Change
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract To better understand the role of internal climate variability (ICV) in climate change impact studies, this study quantifies the importance of ICV [defined as the intermember variability of a single model initial-condition large ensemble (SMILE)] in relation to the anthropogenic climate change (ACC; defined as multimodel ensemble mean) in global and regional climate change using a criterion of time of emergence (ToE). The uncertainty of the estimated ToE is specifically investigated by using three SMILEs to estimate the ICV. The results show that using 1921–40 as a baseline period, the annual mean precipitation ACC is expected to emerge within this century over extratropical regions as well as along the equatorial band. However, ToEs are unlikely to occur, even by the end of this century, over intratropical regions outside of the equatorial band. In contrast, annual mean temperature ACC has already emerged from the temperature ICV for most of the globe. Similar spatial patterns are observed at the seasonal scale, while a weaker ACC for boreal summer (June–August) precipitation and additional ICV for boreal winter (December–February) temperature translate to later ToEs for some regions. In addition, the uncertainty of ToE related to the choice of a SMILE is mostly less than 20 years for annual mean precipitation and temperature. However, it can be as large as 90 years for annual mean precipitation over some regions. Overall, results indicate that the choice of a SMILE is a significant source of uncertainty in the estimation of ToE and results based on only one SMILE should be interpreted with caution.
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 | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".