Projected changes in variability of fire weather in boreal regions under different levels of global warming
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recent years have seen unprecedented fire activity at Arctic latitudes, leading to severe consequences including unhealthy air quality in high latitude towns and cities. While wildfire occurrence and severity result from a complex interplay between natural and anthropogenic factors, weather is a key factor. Weather conditions that promote high wildfire risk are characterized by the combination of high temperatures, little precipitation and low humidity, and often high winds. All of these can be affected by human-induced climate change and evidence is emerging that wildfire risk is already increasing in many regions. Such changes not only manifest as shifts in the means and extremes of the weather variables but can also be changes in the shape of their distributions. The importance of the full, regional Probability Density Functions (PDFs) of individual and aggregated variables, which contain information on expected weather not apparent from the distribution mean or tails, but through changes to their overall shape, for understanding climate risk has been broadly discussed in the literature. Furthermore, while simulations with regional climate models to derive such information are costly and time consuming, the advent of large ensembles of coupled climate model simulations has recently opened new opportunities. Here we present a detailed characterization of the distribution and variability of weather variables conducive to wildfire risk across five high-latitude boreal regions in North America, Scandinavia and Russia. Building on methodology developed in Samset et al. (2019), we quantify the PDFs of daily data for a broad set of individual variables, as well as for the aggregate change expressed using the Canadian Fire Weather Index. Using ensembles of coupled simulations from two climate models (CanESM5 and MPI-ESM1-2) and two CMIP6 scenarios (the Shared Socioeconomic Pathways SSP1-2.6 and SSP5-8.5), we consistently quantify the changes of regionally and seasonally resolved PDFs under different levels of global warming. Our results provide a comprehensive picture of the potential future changes in drivers of fire weather and wildfire risk in the pan-Arctic region and demonstrate the difference between regions. We also show how statistical descriptions combined with emulation of Earth System Model (ESM) information can offer an alternative pathway to resource demanding model runs, for rapidly translating science to user-oriented information.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".