ArticleNature communications2025
Temperature variability projections remain uncertain after constraining them to best performing Large Ensembles of individual Climate Models.
Article in Nature communications, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Changes in temperature variability affect the frequency and intensity of extreme events, as well as the regional range of temperatures that ecosystems and society need to adapt to. While accurate projections of temperature variability are vital for understanding climate change and its impacts, they remain highly uncertain. We use rank-frequency analysis to evaluate the performance of eleven single model initial-condition large ensembles (SMILEs) against observations in the historical period, and use those that best represent historical regional variability to constrain projections of future temperature variability. Constrained projections from the best-performing SMILEs still show large uncertainties in the intensity and the sign of the variability change for large areas of the globe. Our results highlight poorly modelled regions where observed variability is not well represented such as large parts of Australia, South America, and Africa, particularly in their local summer season, underscoring the need for further modelling improvements over crucial regions. In these regions, the constrained projected change is typically larger than in the unconstrained ensemble, suggesting that in these regions, multi-model mean projections may underestimate future variability change.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.