↓ Skip to main content

Predicting future uncertainty constraints on global warming projections

Overview of attention for article published in Scientific Reports, January 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (82nd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (75th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
12 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
42 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
76 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Predicting future uncertainty constraints on global warming projections
Published in
Scientific Reports, January 2016
DOI 10.1038/srep18903
Pubmed ID
Authors

H. Shiogama, D. Stone, S. Emori, K. Takahashi, S. Mori, A. Maeda, Y. Ishizaki, M. R. Allen

Abstract

Projections of global mean temperature changes (ΔT) in the future are associated with intrinsic uncertainties. Much climate policy discourse has been guided by "current knowledge" of the ΔTs uncertainty, ignoring the likely future reductions of the uncertainty, because a mechanism for predicting these reductions is lacking. By using simulations of Global Climate Models from the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 5 ensemble as pseudo past and future observations, we estimate how fast and in what way the uncertainties of ΔT can decline when the current observation network of surface air temperature is maintained. At least in the world of pseudo observations under the Representative Concentration Pathways (RCPs), we can drastically reduce more than 50% of the ΔTs uncertainty in the 2040 s by 2029, and more than 60% of the ΔTs uncertainty in the 2090 s by 2049. Under the highest forcing scenario of RCPs, we can predict the true timing of passing the 2 °C (3 °C) warming threshold 20 (30) years in advance with errors less than 10 years. These results demonstrate potential for sequential decision-making strategies to take advantage of future progress in understanding of anthropogenic climate change.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 12 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 76 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Israel 1 1%
Denmark 1 1%
Unknown 74 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 19 25%
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 20%
Student > Master 8 11%
Other 5 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 5%
Other 9 12%
Unknown 16 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Earth and Planetary Sciences 22 29%
Environmental Science 16 21%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 8%
Engineering 3 4%
Computer Science 2 3%
Other 7 9%
Unknown 20 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 16 September 2016.
All research outputs
#3,898,866
of 22,758,248 outputs
Outputs from Scientific Reports
#30,577
of 122,769 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#68,029
of 394,647 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Scientific Reports
#794
of 3,188 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,758,248 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 82nd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 122,769 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 18.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 394,647 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3,188 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.