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.
原文链接
分享
引用
