MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Duration of frozen days show a strong decline in the Northern Hemisphere mainly driven by autumn temperature increase

2025· article· en· W4406772618 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Qiangqiang Yuan, Wen Zhong, Qianqian Yang, Yanfei Peng, Tobias Bolch, Yuan Wang, Linwei Yue, Huanfeng Shen, Liangpei Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Innovation Geoscience · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicClimate change and permafrost
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDuration (music)Northern HemisphereMaximum temperatureClimatologyAtmospheric sciencesEnvironmental scienceDemographyGeographyGeologyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Thawing permafrost releases methane and carbon dioxide to the atmosphere, contributing to positive feedback loop in global warming. Therefore, accurately monitoring changes in the permafrost freeze–thaw status is imperative. However, the spatiotemporal evolution and potential driving factors remain elusive. Here, we investigated the freeze–thaw status and driving factors by developing novel machine learning models trained on satellite and in situ observations in the Northern Hemisphere. We find that the frozen duration decreased on average by 0.17 days/yr since 1990 with the highest decrease of approximately up to 1.0 days/yr in parts of Belarus and Ukraine, followed by the Yukon region in Canada and Alaska. This decrease is primarily driven by temperatures in boreal autumn and spring and by precipitation and vegetation cover in boreal spring. The frozen duration is projected to decline further with reduction rates doubling until 2050 for the highest and moderate emission scenarios.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.049

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.228 · 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 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Innovation Geoscience→Same topicClimate change and permafrost→French-language works237,207→