Projecting Hurricane Risk in Atlantic Canada under Climate Change
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Atlantic Canada faces significant hurricane threats from damaging winds and coastal flooding that are projected to intensify under climate change. This study adopts a two-stage framework. First, the evolution of wind and coastal-flood hazards is quantified from a historical baseline (1979-2014) to two future periods: a near future (2024-2059) and a far future (2060-2095). Hazard fields are constructed from large ensembles of physics-informed synthetic hurricane tracks, and changes are evaluated in return-period wind speeds and in inundation depth and extent, with sea-level rise included for flood projections. The second stage estimates hurricane risk using wind as an operational proxy for total loss, combining the simulated wind fields with exposure data and a vulnerability relationship to compute expected damages. This design clarifies how physical drivers change and how those shifts translate into loss potential without requiring fully coupled compound-loss modeling. Results indicate an intensification of wind extremes and a substantial amplification of coastal inundation, yielding higher wind-proxy risk for many coastal communities. Spatial patterns show a heterogeneous escalation of risk concentrated along exposed shorelines and urban corridors. This comprehensive analysis of both hazard evolution and proxy risk provides decision-ready evidence on where and by how much hurricane losses are likely to grow. The approach clarifies the link between physical drivers and loss potential, ensuring compatibility with standard wind-centric workflows used in engineering and insurance practice.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".