Tropical Cyclones and Climate Change Assessment: Part I: Detection and Attribution
Tropical Cyclones and Climate Change Assessment: Part I: Detection and Attribution
复制标题
DOI：
10.1175/bams-d-18-0189.1
复制
发表时间：
2019-10-01
影响因子：
8
通讯作者：
Wu, Liguang
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Knutson, Thomas;Camargo, Suzana J.;Wu, Liguang
对是否能在观测中识别出热带气旋（TC）活动的可检测变化以及这些变化是否可归因于人为气候变化进行了评估。总体而言，历史数据表明，在一些与热带气旋路径变化相关的区域存在可检测到的热带气旋活动变化，而数据质量和数量问题给基于热带气旋强度和频率的分析带来了更大挑战。使用优先避免第一类错误（即夸大人为影响或检测结果）的常规方法，对一些已发表的关于可能检测到的人为对热带气旋影响的具体结论（案例研究）进行了评估。我们得出结论，至少有低到中等的置信度认为，在北太平洋西部观测到的最大强度纬度向极地迁移是可检测到的，或者与预期的自然变率相比是极不寻常的。作者团队对于观测到的任何热带气旋变化是否显示出明显的人为影响，或者任何其他观测到的变化是否代表可检测到的变化存在分歧。然后，通过评估可检测到的人为影响的证据，同时寻求减少第二类错误（即遗漏或低估人为影响或检测结果）的可能性，对该问题进行了重新阐述。为此，我们使用了一个弱得多的“证据平衡”标准进行评估。这导致了一些更具推测性的热带气旋检测和/或归因陈述，我们认识到这些陈述有很大可能是误报（即夸大人为影响或检测结果），但可能对风险评估有用。报告中给出了使用这种方法得出的这些替代陈述的几个例子。
An assessment was made of whether detectable changes in tropical cyclone (TC) activity are identifiable in observations and whether any changes can be attributed to anthropogenic climate change. Overall, historical data suggest detectable TC activity changes in some regions associated with TC track changes, while data quality and quantity issues create greater challenges for analyses based on TC intensity and frequency. A number of specific published conclusions (case studies) about possible detectable anthropogenic influence on TCs were assessed using the conventional approach of preferentially avoiding type I errors (i.e., overstating anthropogenic influence or detection). We conclude there is at least low to medium confidence that the observed poleward migration of the latitude of maximum intensity in the western North Pacific is detectable, or highly unusual compared to expected natural variability. Opinion on the author team was divided on whether any observed TC changes demonstrate discernible anthropogenic influence, or whether any other observed changes represent detectable changes. The issue was then reframed by assessing evidence for detectable anthropogenic influence while seeking to reduce the chance of type II errors (i.e., missing or understating anthropogenic influence or detection). For this purpose, we used a much weaker "balance of evidence" criterion for assessment. This leads to a number of more speculative TC detection and/or attribution statements, which we recognize have substantial potential for being false alarms (i.e., overstating anthropogenic influence or detection) but which may be useful for risk assessment. Several examples of these alternative statements, derived using this approach, are presented in the report.