MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414879877 · doi:10.3389/fenvs.2025.1643416

Managing extremes in the Anthropocene: a causal, stochastic physics approach

2025· article· en· W4414879877 on OpenAlexafffund
Samadhee Kaluarachchi, Younes Alila

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Environmental Science · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnergy
TopicGlobal Energy and Sustainability Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsProbabilistic logicCausationClimate changeAdaptation (eye)Natural (archaeology)Risk managementRisk assessmentBridging (networking)Climate extremes

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Anthropogenic activities have led to an alarming rise in frequencies and severities of hydroclimatic extremes, resulting in deaths, adverse health impacts, near-destruction of municipalities, and trillions of US dollars or equivalent in economic impacts worldwide. With trends expected to continue or intensify, there is growing pressure to re-evaluate current adaptation and mitigation strategies. Here, it is demonstrated that while much of risk management, particularly of floods, remains magnitude-centric, a frequency-centric approach is key for reliably predicting risks and designing cost-effective solutions. This approach requires bridging hydroclimatology’s extreme value theory with the modern science of causation through stochastic physics. It anchors physical understanding in probabilistic frameworks, centring environmental and anthropogenic controls when modelling and interpreting frequency distributions. Linking natural controls to a system’s undisturbed state and subsequent frequency-centric quantification of anthropogenic influence highlights large frequency changes far surpassing changes in magnitude, aligning scientific and professional practice with reality. In fact, the dramatic rise in extremes likely arises in part as a manifestation of an undisturbed distribution that is inherently highly sensitive to anthropogenic change, a crucial question for risk management. Only with an accurate portrayal of risk and sensitivity grounded in the deeper meaning of probability can hydroclimatology motivate strong policies and support the design of innovative solutions in the Anthropocene.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.273
Threshold uncertainty score0.671

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.241 · 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 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

Citations4
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Environmental ScienceSame topicGlobal Energy and Sustainability ResearchFrench-language works237,207