Rapid attribution analysis of the extraordinary heat wave on the Pacific coast of the US and Canada in June 2021
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. Towards the end of June 2021, temperature records were broken by several degrees Celsius in several cities in the Pacific northwest areas of the U.S. and Canada, leading to spikes in sudden deaths, and sharp increases in hospital visits for heat-related illnesses and emergency calls. Here we present a multi-model, multi-method attribution analysis to investigate to what extent human-induced climate change has influenced the probability and intensity of extreme heatwaves in this region. Based on observations and modeling, the occurrence of a heatwave with maximum daily temperatures (TXx) as observed in the area 45° N–52° N, 119° W–123° W, was found to be virtually impossible without human-caused climate change. The observed temperatures were so extreme that they lie far outside the range of historically observed temperatures. This makes it hard to quantify with confidence how rare the event was. In the most realistic statistical analysis, which uses the assumption that the heatwave was a very low probability event that was not caused by new nonlinearities, the event is estimated to be about a 1 in 1000 year event in today’s climate. With this assumption and combining the results from the analysis of climate models and weather observations, an event, defined as daily maximum temperatures (TXx) in the heatwave region, as rare as 1 in a 1000 years would have been at least 150 times rarer without human-induced climate change. Also, this heatwave was about 2 °C hotter than a 1 in 1000-year heatwave that at the beginning of the industrial revolution would have been (when global mean temperatures were 1.2 °C cooler than today). Looking into the future, in a world with 2 °C of global warming (0.8 °C warmer than today), a 1000-year event would be another degree hotter. It would occur roughly every 5 to 10 years in such global warming conditions. Our results provide a strong warning: our rapidly warming climate is bringing us into uncharted territory with significant consequences for health, well-being, and livelihoods. Adaptation and mitigation are urgently needed to prepare societies for a very different future.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".