MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4392135473 · doi:10.31223/x5xm5w

Deciphering the role of evapotranspiration in declining relative humidity trends over land

2024· preprint· en· W4392135473 on OpenAlexaff
Yeonuk Kim, Mark S. Johnson

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicClimate variability and models
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEvapotranspirationAdvectionClimatologyEnvironmental scienceRelative humidityClimate modelClimate changeAtmospheric sciencesAtmosphere (unit)HumidityGeographyMeteorologyGeologyOceanographyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In recent decades, relative humidity (RH) over land has declined, driving increases in droughts and wildfires. Previous explanations attribute this trend to insufficient moisture advection from the ocean to sustain RH over land, but this ignores atmospheric moisture supplied from terrestrial evapotranspiration (E). While state-of-the-art climate models underestimate this RH trend, the reason behind this discrepancy remains unclear. Here, we decipher the influence of E on near-surface humidity using observations, reanalysis, and climate simulations. Global E in reanalysis has remained fairly steady in recent decades. Consequently, changes in ocean advection can reproduce observed RH declines without considering changes in E. Conversely, climate simulations estimate significant increases in E in recent decades, leading to model-based underestimation of observed RH declines. These findings suggest E intensifications may be overestimated in current climate models, thus underestimating coupled land-atmosphere drying in model output. We also highlight an upper limit of E change under observed RH trends, which could help benchmark global E trend analyses.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.033
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.255 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicClimate variability and models→French-language works237,207→