Attribution of Observed Periodicity in Extreme Weather Events in Eastern North America
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Instrumental weather records (1880–2020s) from eastern North America were analyzed to characterize the regional patterns and drivers of seasonal extreme weather (snow, rain, high and low temperatures). Using agglomerative hierarchical clustering of extreme weather data, the region was divided into three subregions that are influenced by coastal‐marine gradients and latitudinal factors. Subsequent analyses were performed on high‐quality stations from each subregion and results compared between one another. Long‐term locally weighted linear regressions delineated long‐term changes in extreme weather, and a combination of spectral analysis, continuous wavelet transforms, and cross wavelet transforms were used to identify periodic components in the data. Regional extreme weather is generally periodic, composed of interannual to interdecadal‐scale oscillations and driven by several natural climatic oscillations. The most important such oscillation is the 11‐year Schwabe Solar Cycle, which has a strong and continuous effect on regional extreme weather. The Pacific Decadal Oscillation and Quasi Biennial Oscillation also show considerable influence, but intermittently. The El Niño Southern Oscillation, the Arctic Oscillation, and the North Atlantic Oscillation all have a weaker but interrelated influence. While the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation showed the weakest overall influence on regional extreme weather, it demonstrated a clear spatial gradient across the region, unlike the aforementioned oscillations. Long‐term changes in regional extreme weather are not generally important, in that a sustained increase or decrease in extreme weather events is not usually characteristic of the weather records. The primary exception to this result is for extreme minimum temperature events, whose frequency has slightly decreased since the 1880s.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".