Articles | Volume 10, issue 11
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-10-4285-2017
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-10-4285-2017
Methods for assessment of models
 | 
27 Nov 2017
Methods for assessment of models |  | 27 Nov 2017

The Cloud Feedback Model Intercomparison Project (CFMIP) Diagnostic Codes Catalogue – metrics, diagnostics and methodologies to evaluate, understand and improve the representation of clouds and cloud feedbacks in climate models

Yoko Tsushima, Florent Brient, Stephen A. Klein, Dimitra Konsta, Christine C. Nam, Xin Qu, Keith D. Williams, Steven C. Sherwood, Kentaroh Suzuki, and Mark D. Zelinka

Related authors

The Cloud Feedback Model Intercomparison Project (CFMIP) contribution to CMIP6
Mark J. Webb, Timothy Andrews, Alejandro Bodas-Salcedo, Sandrine Bony, Christopher S. Bretherton, Robin Chadwick, Hélène Chepfer, Hervé Douville, Peter Good, Jennifer E. Kay, Stephen A. Klein, Roger Marchand, Brian Medeiros, A. Pier Siebesma, Christopher B. Skinner, Bjorn Stevens, George Tselioudis, Yoko Tsushima, and Masahiro Watanabe
Geosci. Model Dev., 10, 359–384, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-10-359-2017,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-10-359-2017, 2017
Short summary

Related subject area

Climate and Earth system modeling
Modelling emission and transport of key components of primary marine organic aerosol using the global aerosol–climate model ECHAM6.3–HAM2.3
Anisbel Leon-Marcos, Moritz Zeising, Manuela van Pinxteren, Sebastian Zeppenfeld, Astrid Bracher, Elena Barbaro, Anja Engel, Matteo Feltracco, Ina Tegen, and Bernd Heinold
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 4183–4213, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-4183-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-4183-2025, 2025
Short summary
Assessing the climate impact of an improved volcanic sulfate aerosol representation in E3SM
Ziming Ke, Qi Tang, Jean-Christophe Golaz, Xiaohong Liu, and Hailong Wang
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 4137–4153, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-4137-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-4137-2025, 2025
Short summary
Advanced climate model evaluation with ESMValTool v2.11.0 using parallel, out-of-core, and distributed computing
Manuel Schlund, Bouwe Andela, Jörg Benke, Ruth Comer, Birgit Hassler, Emma Hogan, Peter Kalverla, Axel Lauer, Bill Little, Saskia Loosveldt Tomas, Francesco Nattino, Patrick Peglar, Valeriu Predoi, Stef Smeets, Stephen Worsley, Martin Yeo, and Klaus Zimmermann
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 4009–4021, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-4009-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-4009-2025, 2025
Short summary
ICON-HAM-lite 1.0: simulating the Earth system with interactive aerosols at kilometer scales
Philipp Weiss, Ross Herbert, and Philip Stier
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 3877–3894, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-3877-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-3877-2025, 2025
Short summary
Process-based modeling framework for sustainable irrigation management at the regional scale: integrating rice production, water use, and greenhouse gas emissions
Yan Bo, Hao Liang, Tao Li, and Feng Zhou
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 3799–3817, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-3799-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-3799-2025, 2025
Short summary

Cited articles

Anderberg, M.: Cluster analysis for applications, Academic Press, New York, 359 pp., 1973.
Barnes, E. and Polvani, L.: Response of the Midlatitude Jets, and of Their Variability, to Increased Greenhouse Gases in the CMIP5 Models, J. Climate, 26, 7117–7135, https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-12-00536.1, 2013.
Bennhold, F. and Sherwood, S.: Erroneous relationships among humidity and cloud forcing variables in three global climate models, J. Climate, 21, 4190–4206, https://doi.org/10.1175/2008JCLI1969.1, 2008.
Bodas-Salcedo, A., Webb, M., Bony, S., Chepfer, H., Dufresne, J., Klein, S., Zhang, Y., Marchand, R., Haynes, J., Pincus, R., and John, V.: COSP Satellite simulation software for model assessment, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 92, 1023–1043, https://doi.org/10.1175/2011BAMS2856.1, 2011.
Bodas-Salcedo, A., Williams, K., Field, P., and Lock, A.: The Surface Downwelling Solar Radiation Surplus over the Southern Ocean in the Met Office Model: The Role of Midlatitude Cyclone Clouds, J. Climate, 25, 7467–7486, https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-11-00702.1, 2012.
Short summary
Cloud feedback is the largest uncertainty associated with estimates of climate sensitivity. Diagnostics have been developed to evaluate cloud processes in climate models. For this understanding to be reflected in better estimates of cloud feedbacks, it is vital to continue to develop such tools and to exploit them fully during the model development process. Code repositories have been created to store and document the programs which will allow climate modellers to compute these diagnostics.
Share