Climate attribution time series track the evolution of human influence on North Pacific sea surface temperature
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract We apply climate attribution techniques to sea surface temperature time series from five regional North Pacific ecosystems to track the growth in human influence on ocean temperatures over the past seven decades (1950–2022). Using Bayesian estimates of the Fraction of Attributable Risk (FAR) and Risk Ratio (RR) derived from 23 global climate models, we show that human influence on regional ocean temperatures could first be detected in the 1970s and grew until 2014–2020 temperatures showed overwhelming evidence of human contribution. For the entire North Pacific, FAR and RR values show that temperatures have reached levels that were likely impossible in the preindustrial climate, indicating that the question of attribution is already obsolete at the basin scale. Regional results indicate the strongest evidence for human influence in the northernmost ecosystems (Eastern Bering Sea and Gulf of Alaska), though all regions showed FAR values > 0.98 for at least one year. Extreme regional SST values that were expected every 1000–10 000 years in the preindustrial climate are expected every 5–40 years in the current climate. We use the Gulf of Alaska sockeye salmon fishery to show how attribution time series may be used to contextualize the impacts of human-induced ocean warming on ecosystem services. We link negative warming effects on sockeye fishery catches to increasing human influence on regional temperatures (increasing FAR values), and we find that sockeye salmon migrating to sea in years with the strongest evidence for human effects on temperature (FAR ⩾ 0.98) produce catches 1.4 standard deviations below the long-term log mean. Attribution time series may be helpful indicators for better defining the human role in observed climate change impacts, and may thus help researchers, managers, and stakeholders to better understand and plan for the effects of climate change.
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 | 0.005 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".