On structural errors in emergent constraints

B. Sanderson, A. Pendergrass, C. Koven, F. Brient, B. Booth, R. Fisher, R. Knutti
{"title":"On structural errors in emergent constraints","authors":"B. Sanderson, A. Pendergrass, C. Koven, F. Brient, B. Booth, R. Fisher, R. Knutti","doi":"10.5194/ESD-2020-85","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract. Studies of emergent constraints have frequently proposed that a single metric alone can constrain future responses of the Earth system to anthropogenic emissions. The prevalence of this thinking has led to literature and messaging which is sometimes confusing to policymakers, with a series of studies over the last decade making confident, yet contradictory, claims on the probability bounds of key climate variables. Here, we illustrate that emergent constraints are more likely to occur where the variance across an ensemble of climate models of both observable and future climate arises from common structural assumptions and few degrees of freedom. Such cases are likely to occur when processes are represented in a common, oversimplified fashion throughout the ensemble, about which we have the least confidence in performance out of sample. We consider these issues in the context of a number of published constraints, and argue that the application of emergent constraints alone to estimate uncertainties in unknown climate responses can potentially lead to bias and overconfidence in constrained projections. Together with statistical robustness and plausibility of mechanism, assessments of climate responses must include multiple lines of evidence to identify biases that arise from common oversimplified modeling assumptions which impact both present and future climate simulations in order to mitigate against the influence of common structural biases.","PeriodicalId":11466,"journal":{"name":"Earth System Dynamics Discussions","volume":"30 1","pages":"1-30"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-02-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Earth System Dynamics Discussions","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5194/ESD-2020-85","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Abstract. Studies of emergent constraints have frequently proposed that a single metric alone can constrain future responses of the Earth system to anthropogenic emissions. The prevalence of this thinking has led to literature and messaging which is sometimes confusing to policymakers, with a series of studies over the last decade making confident, yet contradictory, claims on the probability bounds of key climate variables. Here, we illustrate that emergent constraints are more likely to occur where the variance across an ensemble of climate models of both observable and future climate arises from common structural assumptions and few degrees of freedom. Such cases are likely to occur when processes are represented in a common, oversimplified fashion throughout the ensemble, about which we have the least confidence in performance out of sample. We consider these issues in the context of a number of published constraints, and argue that the application of emergent constraints alone to estimate uncertainties in unknown climate responses can potentially lead to bias and overconfidence in constrained projections. Together with statistical robustness and plausibility of mechanism, assessments of climate responses must include multiple lines of evidence to identify biases that arise from common oversimplified modeling assumptions which impact both present and future climate simulations in order to mitigate against the influence of common structural biases.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
论紧急约束中的结构误差
摘要对紧急约束的研究经常提出,单独的一个度量可以约束地球系统对人为排放的未来响应。这种思想的盛行导致了一些文献和信息有时会让政策制定者感到困惑,在过去十年中,一系列研究对关键气候变量的概率界限做出了自信但相互矛盾的主张。在这里,我们说明,当可观测和未来气候的气候模型集合的差异来自共同的结构假设和少数自由度时,更有可能发生紧急约束。当过程在整个集合中以一种常见的、过于简化的方式表示时,这种情况很可能发生,对于这种情况,我们对样本外的性能信心最低。我们在许多已发表的约束条件的背景下考虑这些问题,并认为仅应用紧急约束条件来估计未知气候响应的不确定性可能导致对约束预测的偏差和过度自信。除了统计稳健性和机制的合理性外,气候响应的评估必须包括多种证据,以识别影响当前和未来气候模拟的常见过度简化的建模假设所产生的偏差,从而减轻常见结构偏差的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
ESD Ideas: Arctic amplification's contribution to breaches of the Paris Agreement Derailment risk: A systems analysis that identifies risks which could derail the sustainability transition Nonlinear time series analysis of coastal temperatures and El Niño–Southern Oscillation events in the eastern South Pacific MIROC6 Large Ensemble (MIROC6-LE): experimental design and initial analyses A quantitative assessment of air–sea heat flux trends from ERA5 since 1950 in the North Atlantic basin
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1