Climate extremes and risks: links between climate science and decision-making
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The World Climate Research Programme (WCRP) envisions a future where actionable climate information is universally accessible, supporting decision makers in preparing for and responding to climate change. In this perspective, we advocate for enhancing links between climate science and decision-making through a better and more decision-relevant understanding of climate impacts. The proposed framework comprises three pillars: climate science, impact science, and decision-making, focusing on generating seamless climate information from sub-seasonal, seasonal, decadal to century timescales informed by observed climate events and their impacts. The link between climate science and decision-making has strengthened in recent years, partly owing to undeniable impacts arising from disastrous weather extremes. Enhancing decision-relevant understanding involves utilizing lessons from past extreme events and implementing impact-based early warning systems to improve resilience. Integrated risk assessment and management require a comprehensive approach that encompasses good knowledge about possible impacts, hazard identification, monitoring, and communication of risks while acknowledging uncertainties inherent in climate predictions and projections, but not letting the uncertainty lead to decision paralysis. The importance of data accessibility, especially in the Global South, underscores the need for better coordination and resource allocation. Strategic frameworks should aim to enhance impact-related and open-access climate services around the world. Continuous improvements in predictive modeling and observational data are critical, as is ensuring that climate science remains relevant to decision makers locally and globally. Ultimately, fostering stronger collaborations and dedicated investments to process and tailor climate data will enhance societal preparedness, enabling communities to navigate the complexities of a changing climate effectively.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".