Articles | Volume 10, issue 9
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-10-3207-2017
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-10-3207-2017
Review and perspective paper
 | 
01 Sep 2017
Review and perspective paper |  | 01 Sep 2017

Practice and philosophy of climate model tuning across six US modeling centers

Gavin A. Schmidt, David Bader, Leo J. Donner, Gregory S. Elsaesser, Jean-Christophe Golaz, Cecile Hannay, Andrea Molod, Richard B. Neale, and Suranjana Saha

Related authors

Datasets and protocols for including anomalous freshwater from melting ice sheets in climate simulations
Gavin A. Schmidt, Kenneth D. Mankoff, Jonathan L. Bamber, Dustin Carroll, David M. Chandler, Violaine Coulon, Benjamin J. Davison, Matthew H. England, Paul R. Holland, Nicolas C. Jourdain, Qian Li, Juliana M. Marson, Pierre Mathiot, Clive R. McMahon, Twila A. Moon, Ruth Mottram, Sophie Nowicki, Anne Olivé Abelló, Andrew G. Pauling, Thomas Rackow, and Damien Ringeisen
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1940,https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1940, 2025
Short summary
Exploring the ENSO modulation of the QBO periods with GISS E2.2 models
Tiehan Zhou, Kevin J. DallaSanta, Clara Orbe, David H. Rind, Jeffrey A. Jonas, Larissa Nazarenko, Gavin A. Schmidt, and Gary Russell
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 24, 509–532, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-509-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-509-2024, 2024
Short summary
Multi-variate factorisation of numerical simulations
Daniel J. Lunt, Deepak Chandan, Alan M. Haywood, George M. Lunt, Jonathan C. Rougier, Ulrich Salzmann, Gavin A. Schmidt, and Paul J. Valdes
Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 4307–4317, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-4307-2021,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-4307-2021, 2021
Short summary
The impact of increasing stratospheric radiative damping on the quasi-biennial oscillation period
Tiehan Zhou, Kevin DallaSanta, Larissa Nazarenko, Gavin A. Schmidt, and Zhonghai Jin
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 7395–7407, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-7395-2021,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-7395-2021, 2021
Short summary
ESD Reviews: Model dependence in multi-model climate ensembles: weighting, sub-selection and out-of-sample testing
Gab Abramowitz, Nadja Herger, Ethan Gutmann, Dorit Hammerling, Reto Knutti, Martin Leduc, Ruth Lorenz, Robert Pincus, and Gavin A. Schmidt
Earth Syst. Dynam., 10, 91–105, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-10-91-2019,https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-10-91-2019, 2019
Short summary

Related subject area

Climate and Earth system modeling
SASIEv.1: a framework for seasonal and multi-centennial Arctic sea ice emulation
Sian Megan Chilcott, Malte Meinshausen, and Dirk Notz
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 4965–4982, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-4965-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-4965-2025, 2025
Short summary
COSP-RTTOV-1.0: flexible radiation diagnostics to enable new science applications in model evaluation, climate change detection, and satellite mission design
Jonah K. Shaw, Dustin J. Swales, Sergio DeSouza-Machado, David D. Turner, Jennifer E. Kay, and David P. Schneider
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 4935–4950, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-4935-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-4935-2025, 2025
Short summary
Assessing modifications to the Abdul-Razzak and Ghan aerosol activation parameterization (version ARG2000) to improve simulated aerosol–cloud radiative effects in the UK Met Office Unified Model (UM version 13.0)
Pratapaditya Ghosh, Katherine J. Evans, Daniel P. Grosvenor, Hyun-Gyu Kang, Salil Mahajan, Min Xu, Wei Zhang, and Hamish Gordon
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 4899–4913, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-4899-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-4899-2025, 2025
Short summary
Correction of sea surface biases in the NEMO ocean general circulation model using neural networks
Andrea Storto, Sergey Frolov, Laura Slivinski, and Chunxue Yang
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 4789–4804, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-4789-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-4789-2025, 2025
Short summary
Representing lateral groundwater flow from land to river in Earth system models
Chang Liao, L. Ruby Leung, Yilin Fang, Teklu Tesfa, and Robinson Negron-Juarez
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 4601–4624, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-4601-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-4601-2025, 2025
Short summary

Cited articles

Alexander, M. and Dunkerton, T.: A spectral parameterization of mean-flow forcing due to breaking gravity waves, J. Atmos. Sci., 56, 4167–4182, 1999.
Allan, R. P., Liu, C., Loeb, N. G., Palmer, M. D., Roberts, M., Smith, D., and Vidale, P.-L.: Changes in global net radiative imbalance 1985–2012, Geophys. Res. Lett., 41, 5588–5597, https://doi.org/10.1002/2014gl060962, 2014.
Annan, J. D. and Hargreaves, J. C.: On the meaning of independence in climate science, Earth Syst. Dynam., 8, 211–224, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-8-211-2017, 2017.
Benedict, J., Maloney, E., Sobel, A., Frierson, D., and Donner, L.: Tropical intraseasonal variability in Version 3 of the GFDL atmosphere model, J. Climate, 26, 426–449, https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-12-00103.1, 2013.
Short summary
The development of coupled ocean atmosphere climate models is a complex process that inevitably includes multiple calibration steps (sometimes called tuning). Tuning uses degrees of freedom allowed by uncertainties in model approximations to modify parameters to make the simulation better align with some selected observed target(s). We describe how these tuning targets, parameters, and philosophy vary across six US modeling centers in order to increase the transparency of the practice.
Share