MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4377093606 · doi:10.1038/s41467-023-38510-9

Increasing global precipitation whiplash due to anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions

2023· article· en· W4377093606 on OpenAlexaff
Xuezhi Tan, Xinxin Wu, Zeqin Huang, Jianyu Fu, Xuejin Tan, Simin Deng, Yaxin Liu, Thian Yew Gan, Bingjun Liu

Bibliographic record

VenueNature Communications · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicClimate variability and models
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersGuangzhou Municipal Science and Technology ProjectNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsGreenhouse gasEnvironmental sciencePrecipitationWhiplashNatural resource economicsEnvironmental protectionPoison controlMeteorologyEcologyEnvironmental healthGeographyMedicineBiologyEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Precipitation whiplash, including abrupt shifts between wet and dry extremes, can cause large adverse impacts on human and natural systems. Here we quantify observed and projected changes in characteristics of sub-seasonal precipitation whiplash and investigate the role of individual anthropogenic influences on these changes. Results show that the occurrence frequency of global precipitation whiplash is projected to be 2.56 ± 0.16 times higher than in 1979–2019 by the end of the 21 st Century, with increasingly rapid and intense transitions between two extremes. The most dramatic increases of whiplash show in the polar and monsoon regions. Changes in precipitation whiplash show a much higher percentage change than precipitation totals. In historical simulations, anthropogenic greenhouse gas (GHG) and aerosol emissions have increased and decreased precipitation whiplash occurrences, respectively. By 2079, anthropogenic GHGs are projected to increase 55 ± 4% of the occurrences risk of precipitation whiplash, which is driven by shifts in circulation patterns conducive to precipitation extremes.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.144
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.031
GPT teacher head0.325
Teacher spread0.295 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations128
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNature CommunicationsSame topicClimate variability and modelsFrench-language works237,207