The influence of atmospheric drivers, environmental factors, and urban land use on extreme hourly precipitation trends over the CONtiguous United States for 40 years at 4-km resolution (CONUS404)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
High-resolution datasets provide unique insights into extreme precipitation dynamics, capturing atmospheric, environmental, and anthropogenic influences missed by coarser data. Here, we use the 4 km CONUS404 dataset (1980-2021) to analyze trends in extreme hourly precipitation across the contiguous USA and adjacent regions. Using the 42 highest hourly precipitation values (HP42) from the 42-year dataset, we estimate regression slopes for their annual occurrence and intensity. ANOVA analysis examines the effects of elevation and land use on HP42 trends, while Multiple Linear Regression (MLR) assesses the effects of atmospheric drivers (dew point temperature, El Niño, La Niña, and North Atlantic Oscillation). Positive frequency slopes dominate central and northeastern regions, while decreases occur in the West and Southwest. Magnitude slopes are less spatially consistent but near zero in the high-elevation, arid regions of the West. Dew point temperature (TD) drives magnitude trends, while frequency trends are influenced by TD, La Niña, and the positive North Atlantic Oscillation index. Elevation significantly shapes frequency trends, with higher trends at lower and medium elevations (200-1000 m) and weaker trends above 1500 m. Land use impacts vary with elevation; Urban areas show decreasing frequency across several elevations, while natural land uses such as forests and wetlands often exhibit an increase or stabilization in precipitation trends at various elevations. Aggregating variables to coarser resolutions improves MLR model performance, unveiling significant factors by reducing noise. Hotspot analysis reveals that larger cities (e.g., New York, Los Angeles) have concentrated precipitation hotspots, while smaller cities (e.g., Memphis and Nashville) exhibit scattered trends. The overlap between frequency and magnitude clusters highlights shared drivers, suggesting increased vulnerability in peri-urban areas. These findings underscore the need for adaptive strategies addressing the complex interplay of urbanization, elevation, and climate factors.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".