MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410398022 · doi:10.1016/j.dib.2025.111667

Dataset of future-shifted weather files for Canada using climate projections from CMIP6

2025· article· en· W4410398022 on OpenAlexafffundabout
S. R. Sobie, Charles L. Curry

Bibliographic record

VenueData in Brief · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicClimate variability and models
Canadian institutionsPacific Institute for Climate SolutionsUniversity of Victoria
FundersEnvironment and Climate Change Canada
KeywordsClimatologyClimate changeEnvironmental scienceMeteorologyGeographyGeologyOceanography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Investigating energy use in new building designs or existing structures in Canada is often performed with energy models that incorporate present-day climate information from the Canadian Weather Year for Energy Calculation 2020 (CWEC2020) weather files. Here we present a new dataset of future-shifted versions of these weather files that have been produced at all CWEC2020 sites across Canada, incorporating projections from the latest generation of climate models from CMIP6. These future-shifted files have been generated using a weather file "morphing" procedure applied to adjust hourly time series of selected thermodynamic variables including dry bulb and dew point temperature, relative humidity, and surface pressure. Projected changes used to calculate morphing factors were taken from CMIP6 global climate models following low, medium and high future emissions pathways (SSP1 2.6, SSP2 4.5, SSP5 8.5). Using the projections from each pathway, future-shifted files have been produced for five future periods from the 2040s through the 2080s. These files facilitate the use of energy modelling to understand building performance and guide design choices for infrastructure under future climate change. All of the future-shifted CWEC2020 files are publicly available via the Pacific Climate Impacts Consortium (PCIC) Weather Files Data Portal at https://www.pacificclimate.org/data/weather-files.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.198
Threshold uncertainty score0.559

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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 science0.0000.001
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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.257 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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
Published2025
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueData in BriefSame topicClimate variability and modelsFrench-language works237,207