Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 268

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 16 of the 16 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Implementation and comparison of a suite of heat stress metrics within the Community Land Model version 4.5

Open access
Buzan, J. R., Oleson, K., Huber, M.·2015·Geoscientific Model Development

Abstract

Abstract. We implement and analyze 13 different metrics (4 moist thermodynamic quantities and 9 heat stress metrics) in the Community Land Model (CLM4.5), the land surface component of the Community Earth System Model (CESM). We call these routines the HumanIndexMod. We limit the algorithms of the HumanIndexMod to meteorological inputs of temperature, moisture, and pressure for their calculation. All metrics assume no direct sunlight exposure. The goal of this project is to implement a common framework for calculating operationally used heat stress metrics, in climate models, offline output, and locally sourced weather data sets, with the intent that the HumanIndexMod may be used with the broadest of applications. The thermodynamic quantities use the latest, most accurate and efficient algorithms available, which in turn are used as inputs to the heat stress metrics. There are three advantages of adding these metrics to CLM4.5: (1) improved moist thermodynamic quantities; (2) quantifying heat stress in every available environment within CLM4.5; and (3) these metrics may be used with human, animal, and industrial applications. We demonstrate the capabilities of the HumanIndexMod in a default configuration simulation using CLM4.5. We output 4× daily temporal resolution globally. We show that the advantage of implementing these routines into CLM4.5 is capturing the nonlinearity of the covariation of temperature and moisture conditions. For example, we show that there are systematic biases of up to 1.5 °C between monthly and ±0.5 °C between 4× daily offline calculations and the online instantaneous calculation, respectively. Additionally, we show that the differences between an inaccurate wet bulb calculation and the improved wet bulb calculation are ±1.5 °C. These differences are important due to human responses to heat stress being nonlinear. Furthermore, we show heat stress has unique regional characteristics. Some metrics have a strong dependency on regionally extreme moisture, while others have a strong dependency on regionally extreme temperature.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.5194/gmd-8-151-2015

Cites

16 of 16 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 16 references

Cited by

See all 268

Metadata

Authors
Buzan, J. R., Oleson, K., & Huber, M.
Venue
Geoscientific Model Development
Published
2015-02-05
Volume
8
Issue
2
Pages
151-170
ISSN
  • 1991-959X (ISSN-L)
  • 1991-9603
OpenAlex
W2078831742
Cited by
268
References
16
FWCI
6.45
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
gold

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Implementation and comparison of a suite of heat stress metrics within the Community Land Model version 4.5. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.5194/gmd-8-151-2015
The paper
Buzan, J. R., Oleson, K., & Huber, M. (2015). Implementation and comparison of a suite of heat stress metrics within the Community Land Model version 4.5. Geoscientific Model Development. https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-8-151-2015

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.