Historical Northern Hemisphere snow cover trends and projectedchanges in the CMIP-6 multi-model ensemble
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. This paper presents an analysis of observed and simulated historical snow cover extent and snow mass, along with future snow cover projections from models participating in the 6th phase of the World Climate Research Programme Coupled Model Inter-comparison Project (CMIP-6). Where appropriate, the CMIP-6 output is compared to CMIP-5 results in order to assess progress (or absence thereof) between successive model generations. An ensemble of six products are used to produce a new time series of northern hemisphere snow extent anomalies and trends; a subset of four of these products are used for snow mass. Trends in snow extent over 1981–2018 are negative in all months, and exceed −50 × 103 km2 during November, December, March, and May. Snow mass trends are approximately −5 Gt/year or more for all months from December to May. Overall, the CMIP-6 multi-model ensemble better represents the snow extent climatology over the 1981–2014 period for all months, correcting a low bias in CMIP-5. Simulated snow extent and snow mass trends over the 1981–2014 period are slightly stronger in CMIP-6 than in CMIP-5, although large inter-model spread remains in the simulated trends for both variables. There is a single linear relationship between projected spring snow extent and global surface air temperature (GSAT) changes, which is valid across all scenarios. This finding suggests that Northern Hemisphere spring snow extent will decrease by about 8 % relative to the 1995–2014 level per °C of GSAT increase. The sensitivity of snow to temperature forcing largely explains the absence of any climate change pathway dependency, similar to other fast response components of the cryosphere such as sea ice and near surface permafrost.
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) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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".