MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407948942 · doi:10.1126/sciadv.adr5346

Constraining the entire Earth system projections for more reliable climate change adaptation planning

2025· article· en· W4407948942 on OpenAlexaff
Chao Li, Francis W. Zwiers, Xuebin Zhang, Erich Fischer, Fujun Du, Jieyu Liu, Jianyu Wang, Yongxiao Liang, Tong Li, Lina Yuan

Bibliographic record

VenueScience Advances · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicClimate variability and models
Canadian institutionsEnvironment and Climate Change CanadaPacific Institute for Climate SolutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClimate changeAdaptation (eye)Earth system scienceGlobal warmingEnvironmental resource managementEnvironmental scienceClimate sensitivityClimate modelComputer scienceEcological forecastingNatural hazardTransient climate simulationClimatologyRisk analysis (engineering)MeteorologyGeographyEcologyBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The warming climate is creating increased levels of climate risk because of changes to the hazards to which human and natural systems are exposed. Projections of how those hazards will change are affected by uncertainties in the climate sensitivity of climate models, among other factors. While the level-of-global-warming approach can circumvent model climate sensitivity uncertainties in some applications, practitioners faced with specific adaptation responsibilities often find such projections difficult to use because they generally require time-oriented information. Earth system projections following specified emissions scenarios can, however, be constrained by applying the level-of-global-warming approach to observationally constrained warming projections to yield more reliable time-oriented projections for adaption planning and implementation. This approach also allows individual groups to produce consistent and comparable assessments of multifaceted climate impacts and causal mechanisms, thereby benefiting climate assessments at national and international levels that provide the science basis for adaptation action.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.050

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.269 · 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

Citations8
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScience AdvancesSame topicClimate variability and modelsFrench-language works237,207