MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3134065577 · doi:10.3390/w13050737

Means and Extremes: Evaluation of a CMIP6 Multi-Model Ensemble in Reproducing Historical Climate Characteristics across Alberta, Canada

2021· article· en· W3134065577 on OpenAlexaffabout
M. B. Masud, Quan Cui, Mohamed E. Ammar, Barrie Bonsal, Zahidul Islam, Monireh Faramarzi

Bibliographic record

VenueWater · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicClimate variability and models
Canadian institutionsEnvironment and Climate Change CanadaAlberta Environment and Protected AreasUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClimatologyPrecipitationCoupled model intercomparison projectEnvironmental scienceClimate modelGeneralized Pareto distributionGeneral Circulation ModelAtmospheric sciencesClimate changeMeteorologyExtreme value theoryGeographyStatisticsMathematicsGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study evaluates General Circulation Models (GCMs) participating in the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6) for their ability in simulating historical means and extremes of daily precipitation (P), and daily maximum (Tmax), and minimum temperature (Tmin). Models are evaluated against hybrid observations at 2255 sub-basins across Alberta, Canada using established statistical metrics for the 1983–2014 period. Three extreme indices including consecutive wet days (CWD), summer days (SD), and warm nights (WN) are defined based on the peak over the threshold approach and characterized by duration and frequency. The tail behaviour of extremes is evaluated using the Generalized Pareto Distribution. Regional evaluations are also conducted for four climate sub-regions across the study area. For both mean annual precipitation and mean annual daily temperature, most GCMs more accurately reproduce the observations in northern Alberta and follow a gradient toward the south having the poorest representation in the western mountainous area. Model simulations show statistically better performance in reproducing mean annual daily Tmax than Tmin, and in reproducing annual mean duration compared to the frequency of extreme indices across the province. The Kernel density curves of duration and frequency as simulated by GCMs show closer agreement to that of observations in the case of CWD. However, it is slightly (completely) overestimated (underestimated) by GCMs for warm nights (summer days). The tail behaviour of extremes indicates that GCMs may not incorporate some local processes such as the convective parameterization scheme in the simulation of daily precipitation. Model performances in each of the four sub-regions are quite similar to their performances at the provincial scale. Bias-corrected and downscaled GCM simulations using a hybrid approach show that the downscaled GCM simulations better represent the means and extremes of P characteristics compared to Tmax and Tmin. There is no clear indication of an improved tail behaviour of GPD based on downscaled simulations.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.820
Threshold uncertainty score0.565

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.223 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations27
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWaterSame topicClimate variability and modelsFrench-language works237,207