Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40378207›Full record

ArticleScience advances2025

Should we think of observationally constrained multidecade climate projections as predictions?

Tong Li, Francis W Zwiers, Xuebin Zhang

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Science advances, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Tong LiPacific Climate Impacts Consortium, University of Victoria, Victoria, BC, Canada.ORCID 0000-0001-6204-1172
Francis W ZwiersPacific Climate Impacts Consortium, University of Victoria, Victoria, BC, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-8375-5147
Xuebin ZhangPacific Climate Impacts Consortium, University of Victoria, Victoria, BC, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-6551-6249

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Empirical evidence indicates that the range of model-projected future warming can be successfully narrowed by conditioning the projected warming on past observed warming. We demonstrate that warming projections conditioned on the entire instrumental annual surface temperature record are of sufficiently high quality and should be considered as long-term predictions rather than merely as projections. We support this view by considering the skill of predicted 20- and 50-year lead temperature changes under the Shared Economic Pathway (SSP)1-2.6 and SSP5-8.5 emission scenarios in climates of different sensitivities. Using climate model simulations, we show that adjusting raw multimodel projections of future warming with the Kriging for Climate Change (KCC) method eliminates most biases and reduces the uncertainty of warming projections irrespective of the sensitivity of the climate being considered. Simpler methods, or using only the more recent part of the temperature record, provide less effective constraints. The high-skill future warming predictions obtained via KCC have a serious place in informing global climate policies.

Identifiers

PMID40378207
PMCPMC12083516

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.