MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Pan-Atlantic North American cold spells and European wind extremes in CMIP6 historical simulations

2024· preprint· en· W4400979816 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Richard Leeding, Jacopo Riboldi, Gabriele Messori

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicClimate variability and models
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClimatologyCold waveArcticGeographyEnvironmental scienceGeologyOceanography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

not-yet-known not-yet-known not-yet-known unknown This study investigates the representation of near-simultaneous cold and windy extremes in North America and Europe in an ensemble of historical climate model simulations as compared to reanalysis. By leveraging a weather regime perspective, we identify five dynamical pathways for cold spells in three regions of North America. Three of the pathways also engender European wind extremes. The pathways are: (i) A wave train producing central and eastern Canada cold spells, culminating in Scandinavian blocking. (ii) A persistent Atlantic low producing eastern Canada cold spells and wind extremes in the British Isles. (iii) A quasi-stationary wave-2 pattern producing central Canada cold spells and Scandinavian blocking. (iv) An Arctic high producing eastern United States cold spells and wind extremes in Iberia. (v) A wave train producing eastern United States cold spells, culminating in an Atlantic low and wind extremes in Iberia. Models represent well both the frequency and evolution of the pathways compared to reanalysis. However, they under-represent the frequency of pathways (i) and (iii) associated with Scandinavian blocking. The models perform very well in replicating mean surface temperature anomalies during cold spells, though they perform less well on European wind extremes. Typically, the models capture the region and timing of wind extremes associated with Atlantic lows, albeit with some under-representation of occurrence frequency, but fail to adequately capture the wind extremes associated with Arctic highs. This is linked to deficits in how the models reproduce the evolution of the dynamical pathways in the East Atlantic.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.050
Threshold uncertainty score0.099

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.214 · 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→