Neglected Spatiotemporal Variations of Model Biases in Ensemble‐Based Climate Projections
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The Bayesian model averaging (BMA) method has been widely used for generating probabilistic climate projections. However, the averaging weights used in BMA can only reflect the spatially‐ and temporally‐averaged performance of each ensemble member, without the ability to address the spatiotemporal variations of model biases. This can lead to inevitable exaggeration or understatement of the contributions of individual members to the ensemble mean, thus reducing the robustness of the resulting probabilistic projections. Here we propose a new method to help address the neglected spatiotemporal variations of model biases. Through the proposed method, the BMA weights are used as prior distributions to drive the Bayesian discriminant analysis in order to generate refined weights for individual ensemble models according to their spatially‐ and temporally‐clustered performance. Through applying the proposed method to Canada, we demonstrate its effectiveness in generating robust probabilistic climate projections (e.g., the average R2 increases from 0.82 to 0.89).
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 | 0.006 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".