<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD Journal Publishing with OASIS Tables v3.0 20080202//EN" "journalpub-oasis3.dtd">
<article xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:oasis="http://docs.oasis-open.org/ns/oasis-exchange/table" xml:lang="en" dtd-version="3.0"><?xmltex \makeatother\@nolinetrue\makeatletter?><?xmltex \hack{\allowdisplaybreaks}?>
  <front>
    <journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher">GMD</journal-id><journal-title-group>
    <journal-title>Geoscientific Model Development</journal-title>
    <abbrev-journal-title abbrev-type="publisher">GMD</abbrev-journal-title><abbrev-journal-title abbrev-type="nlm-ta">Geosci. Model Dev.</abbrev-journal-title>
  </journal-title-group><issn pub-type="epub">1991-9603</issn><publisher>
    <publisher-name>Copernicus Publications</publisher-name>
    <publisher-loc>Göttingen, Germany</publisher-loc>
  </publisher></journal-meta>
    <article-meta>
      <article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.5194/gmd-11-3883-2018</article-id><title-group><article-title>LCice 1.0 – a generalized Ice Sheet System Model coupler for LOVECLIM version 1.3:
description, sensitivities, and validation with the Glacial Systems Model (GSM version D2017.aug17)</article-title><alt-title>LCice 1.0</alt-title>
      </title-group><?xmltex \runningtitle{LCice 1.0}?><?xmltex \runningauthor{T. Bahadory and L. Tarasov}?>
      <contrib-group>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Bahadory</surname><given-names>Taimaz</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="yes" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Tarasov</surname><given-names>Lev</given-names></name>
          <email>lev@mun.ca</email>
        </contrib>
        <aff id="aff1"><institution>Dept. of Physics and Physical Oceanography, Memorial University of Newfoundland, St. John's, NL, Canada</institution>
        </aff>
      </contrib-group>
      <author-notes><corresp id="corr1">Lev Tarasov (lev@mun.ca)</corresp></author-notes><pub-date><day>27</day><month>September</month><year>2018</year></pub-date>
      
      <volume>11</volume>
      <issue>9</issue>
      <fpage>3883</fpage><lpage>3902</lpage>
      <history>
        <date date-type="received"><day>7</day><month>November</month><year>2017</year></date>
           <date date-type="rev-request"><day>2</day><month>January</month><year>2018</year></date>
           <date date-type="rev-recd"><day>17</day><month>July</month><year>2018</year></date>
           <date date-type="accepted"><day>29</day><month>August</month><year>2018</year></date>
      </history>
      <permissions>
        
        
      <license license-type="open-access"><license-p>This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. To view a copy of this licence, visit <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/</ext-link></license-p></license></permissions><self-uri xlink:href="https://gmd.copernicus.org/articles/11/3883/2018/gmd-11-3883-2018.html">This article is available from https://gmd.copernicus.org/articles/11/3883/2018/gmd-11-3883-2018.html</self-uri><self-uri xlink:href="https://gmd.copernicus.org/articles/11/3883/2018/gmd-11-3883-2018.pdf">The full text article is available as a PDF file from https://gmd.copernicus.org/articles/11/3883/2018/gmd-11-3883-2018.pdf</self-uri>
      <abstract>
    <p id="d1e87">We have coupled an Earth system model of intermediate complexity
(LOVECLIM) to the Glacial Systems Model (GSM) using the LCice 1.0 coupler. The coupling scheme
is flexible enough to enable asynchronous coupling between any
glacial cycle ice sheet model and (with some code work) any Earth system model of
intermediate complexity (EMIC).
This coupling includes a number of interactions between
ice sheets and climate that are often neglected: dynamic meltwater runoff routing, novel downscaling
for precipitation that corrects orographic forcing to the higher resolution ice sheet grid (“advective precipitation”),
dynamic vertical temperature gradient, and
ocean temperatures for sub-shelf melt.  The sensitivity of the
coupled model with respect to the selected parameterizations and
coupling schemes is investigated. Each new coupling feature
is shown to have a significant impact on ice sheet evolution.</p>
    <p id="d1e90">An ensemble of runs is used to
explore the behaviour of the coupled model over a set of 2000
parameter vectors using present-day (PD) initial and boundary
conditions.  The ensemble of coupled model runs is compared against
PD reanalysis data for atmosphere (2 m temperature,
precipitation, jet stream, and Rossby number of jet), ocean (sea ice
and Atlantic Meridional Overturning
Circulation – AMOC), and Northern Hemisphere
ice sheet thickness and extent.  The parameter vectors are then
narrowed by rejecting model runs (1700 CE to present) with regional land ice volume
changes beyond an acceptance range.  The selected subset
forms the basis for ongoing work to explore the spatial–temporal
phase space of the last two glacial cycles.</p>
  </abstract>
    </article-meta>
  </front>
<body>
      

<sec id="Ch1.S1" sec-type="intro">
  <title>Introduction</title>
      <p id="d1e100">Transitions between glacial and interglacial states have been a
periodic feature of the Earth's climate for the last few million years.
The driver of these transitions is understood to be orbital forcing
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx5 bib1.bibx7 bib1.bibx8  bib1.bibx55" id="paren.1"/>, with an important
role for CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M1" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> variations
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx15 bib1.bibx22" id="paren.2"/>.
Nevertheless, the role that climate feedbacks play in amplifying or
inhibiting the responses to these forcings is not clear.  Given
available proxy data, how well do we know the progression of these
glacial cycles? Is there more than one way each transition could have
occurred? How sensitive were these glacial cycles to small
perturbations in the external forcings (e.g., volcanic eruptions)?  In
order to address these questions, we need to understand the relative
importance of different feedbacks between ice sheets and other aspects
of the climate system.  We can build such understanding by probing
this phase space with physically based models that include the
pertinent feedbacks on glacial timescales.</p>
      <p id="d1e118">Temperature and net precipitation (the solid/liquid fraction thereof)
encompass the main atmospheric impacts on ice sheets.
Marginal ice sheet surface mass balance is very sensitive to the
vertical temperature gradient. As indicated by the observations
presented by <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx23" id="text.3"/>, the
vertical surface temperature gradient (“slope lapse rate”) can be significantly different from the
free-air temperature lapse rate over the Greenland ice sheet. Furthermore, neither
of these vertical temperature gradients are a priori appropriate
for downscaling near surface temperatures to a higher horizontal
resolution grid.
The actual vertical gradient required is the one due to changing the surface topography
in the climate<?pagebreak page3884?> model.
However, most coupled model studies use a fixed vertical temperature
gradient set to an approximate mean free-air lapse rate (usually between
5 and 7 K km<inline-formula><mml:math id="M2" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>) to downscale surface temperatures from coarse climate model
grids <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx24 bib1.bibx19 bib1.bibx69 bib1.bibx1 bib1.bibx4 bib1.bibx3 bib1.bibx14 bib1.bibx52" id="paren.4"/>.
A somewhat more self-consistent approach regarding the atmospheric component of the climate model is provided by
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx59" id="text.5"/>. Their coupler extracts the vertical
“along-slope surface temperature gradient” from the atmospheric model and uses it to
downscale temperatures to the ice sheet model. They find this dynamic
approach has significant impacts, especially over mountainous regions
and Greenland.</p>
      <p id="d1e142">Coarse grid climate models used in long time integrations can not
resolve surface slopes on the generally much higher resolution ice sheet grids to
which they are coupled. Given the strong impact of orographic forcing
on precipitation, this can potentially introduce large errors in
surface mass balance, especially near ice sheet margins and over rough
topography. Therefore, standard bilinear interpolation schemes for downscaling
precipitation to the ice sheet grid preserve these errors.</p>
      <p id="d1e145">Ice sheets directly affect the atmosphere via changing land surface type
(affecting albedo, surface roughness, and moisture fluxes) and changing
topography. Upscaling of topography from the relatively high-resolution
grids of ice sheet models to the course-resolution atmospheric grids (especially
for fast glacial cycle context models) has
a range of options between conserving peak heights and mean heights.
There is no clear criteria for a “best” choice and the sensitivity
to this choice is generally unclear.</p>
      <p id="d1e149">Ice sheets primarily affect oceans directly through meltwater runoff,
and changing ocean bathymetry and land mask (especially gateways). The
effect of ice sheet runoff on the ocean, especially on the AMOC (Atlantic Meridional Overturning
Circulation), has been the focus of many studies, such as <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx70" id="text.6"/>,
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx51" id="text.7"/>, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx63" id="text.8"/>,
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx39" id="text.9"/>,
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx35" id="text.10"/>,
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx49" id="text.11"/>,
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx38" id="text.12"/>,
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx76" id="text.13"/>,
and <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx56" id="text.14"/>.
Their findings show that the modelled AMOC is a function of
the models and the coupling procedures used, in addition to the initial
and boundary conditions of the experiments. These experiments
generally include prescribed freshwater discharge fluxes into the
ocean, in part to isolate AMOC sensitivity to freshwater forcing. Therefore, the
feedback of the resulting climate response on ice sheet discharge is absent.</p>
      <p id="d1e180">The strongest direct impact of the oceans on ice sheets is submarine
melt of tide water glaciers and sub-ice shelf melt.  However, for
continental scale coupled models, sub-shelf melt is either completely
ignored <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx54" id="paren.15"/>, or
parameterized in a highly simplified way (e.g., Roche et al., 2014).</p>

<?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T1" specific-use="star"><caption><p id="d1e189">Feedbacks/interactions sporadically included in previous studies
between the ice sheet model and the rest of the climate system,
compared to the current study. None of these feedbacks/interactions include changes to land mask
and bathymetry except for parameterized Bering Strait
throughflow. Tick indicates included and cross indicates not included.</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><oasis:tgroup cols="6">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="center"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="center"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="4" colname="col4" align="center"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="5" colname="col5" align="center"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="6" colname="col6" align="center"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row>

         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" colname="col1" morerows="1">Source</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Advective</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Dynamic vertical</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col4">Dynamic meltwater</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col5">Sub-shelf</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col6">Dust</oasis:entry>

       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">

         <oasis:entry colname="col2">precipitation</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col3">temperature gradient</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col4">runoff routing</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col5">melt</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col6">deposition</oasis:entry>

       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>

         <oasis:entry colname="col1">
                  <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx62" id="text.16"/>
                </oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col2">X</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col3">X</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col4">X</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col5">X</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col6">X</oasis:entry>

       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>

         <oasis:entry colname="col1">
                  <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx77" id="text.17"/>
                </oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col2">X</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col3">X</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col4">X</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col5">X</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col6">X</oasis:entry>

       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>

         <oasis:entry colname="col1">
                  <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx57" id="text.18"/>
                </oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col2">X</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col3">X</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M3" display="inline"><mml:mo>√</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col5">X</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col6">X</oasis:entry>

       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>

         <oasis:entry colname="col1">
                  <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx20" id="text.19"/>
                </oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col2">X</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col3">X</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col4">X</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col5">X</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col6">X</oasis:entry>

       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>

         <oasis:entry colname="col1">
                  <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx21" id="text.20"/>
                </oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col2">X</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col3">X</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col4">X</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col5">X</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M4" display="inline"><mml:mo>√</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>

       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>

         <oasis:entry colname="col1">
                  <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx59" id="text.21"/>
                </oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col2">X</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M5" display="inline"><mml:mo>√</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col4">X</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M6" display="inline"><mml:mo>√</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col6">X</oasis:entry>

       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">

         <oasis:entry colname="col1">
                  <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx32" id="text.22"/>
                </oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col2">X</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col3">X</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col4">X</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col5">X</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col6">X</oasis:entry>

       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>

         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Current work</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M7" display="inline"><mml:mo>√</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M8" display="inline"><mml:mo>√</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M9" display="inline"><mml:mo>√</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M10" display="inline"><mml:mo>√</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col6">X</oasis:entry>

       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table></table-wrap>

      <p id="d1e494">In this study, our objective is to develop a coupled ice sheet–climate model which encompasses most relevant feedbacks/interactions
between the cryosphere and the atmosphere and ocean for continental
glacial cycle scale contexts. Through a selection of ensemble
parameters, we are also working towards bracketing the strength of
these feedbacks across model ensembles.
We also examined sensitivity to coupling time steps by setting up three
similar simulations with different coupling time steps (100 years, 20 years, and
10 years). Features of note in the coupling and described in this paper include the following:
<list list-type="order"><list-item>
      <p id="d1e499">A dynamic vertical 2 m temperature gradient to improve the temperature
downscaling from the atmosphere model to the ice sheet model.</p></list-item><list-item>
      <p id="d1e503">An advective precipitation downscaling scheme which accounts for wind velocity and topographic slopes.</p></list-item><list-item>
      <p id="d1e507">Dynamic meltwater routing.</p></list-item><list-item>
      <p id="d1e511">An efficient scheme to extract approximate lat/long gridded ocean
temperature fields from LOVECLIM ocean temperature profiles for sub-ice shelf melt computation.</p></list-item></list></p>
      <p id="d1e514">Table <xref ref-type="table" rid="Ch1.T1"/> compares the interactions between ice sheets and
climate models only infrequently included in previous coupled
modelling studies to this study. There are two main interactions yet to be
implemented. First, the dust cycle and its impact on atmospheric
radiative balance and ice surface albedo (and therefore surface mass
balance) awaits future work. Second, the LOVECLIM ocean
component does not handle changing bathymetry and land mask over a transient run. It does
have a parameterized Bering Strait throughflow which permits shutdown
of throughflow when the local water depth approaches zero.</p>
      <p id="d1e520">Climate models used for glacial cycle contexts need to be fast enough
to simulate tens of thousands of years in a reasonable time interval,
while also being complex enough to include all of the important climate dynamics.
We tested every freely available fast model that included ocean, atmosphere,
and dynamical sea ice components, and found a number of published
models to be numerically unstable or otherwise unable to run or
port. The only stable model with all these components was LOVECLIM.
The other models tested and associated porting failures are as follows:<def-list>
          <def-item><term>SPEEDO – </term><def>

      <p id="d1e529">compilation error using PGI and Intel compilers.</p>
          </def></def-item>
          <def-item><term>FOAM (v. 1.5) – </term><def>

      <p id="d1e538">no dynamic sea ice model; compilation error using
PGI and Intel compilers.</p>
          </def></def-item>
          <def-item><term>OSUVic (v. 2.8) – </term><def>

      <p id="d1e547">compilation error.</p>
          </def></def-item>
          <def-item><term>CSIRO-Mk3L (v. 1.2) – </term><def>

      <p id="d1e556">compilation error using PGI, Intel, and GCC
compilers; problem accessing fftw library.</p>
          </def></def-item>
        </def-list>This paper is structured as follows. We first introduce the models in
Sect. <xref ref-type="sec" rid="Ch1.S2"/>. Next, we describe the coupling schemes
between the ice sheet model and the atmosphere and the ocean models in
Sect. <xref ref-type="sec" rid="Ch1.S3"/>. In this section, we use the last glacial
inception time frame (120–110 ka) to show that the inclusion of each
process coupling scheme can have significant impact on the evolution
of major Northern Hemisphere (NH) ice sheets. In Sect. <xref ref-type="sec" rid="Ch1.S4"/>, we
introduce our chosen set of ensemble parameters for the coupled
model. In order to justify this choice of ensemble parameters, we
examine the sensitivity of the coupled model to changes in each
parameter for PD climate. We then sieve the ensemble parameter set
using our coupled model with historical/PD initial and boundary
conditions via a comparison against observational/reanalysis data.</p>
</sec>
<?pagebreak page3885?><sec id="Ch1.S2">
  <title>Models</title>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS1">
  <title>LOVECLIM</title>
      <p id="d1e579">LOVECLIM (version 1.3) is a coupled Earth systems model of intermediate complexity
(EMIC), which consists of atmosphere (ECBilt), ocean with dynamic sea ice (CLIO)
and vegetation (VECODE) modules.  It is fast enough to simulate
the last glacial inception (120 to 100 ka) in less than 3 weeks
using a single computer core.  Therefore, it has been used to simulate
a wide range of different climates from the last glacial maximum
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx57" id="paren.23"/> through the Holocene
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx53" id="paren.24"/> and the last millennium
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx27" id="paren.25"/> to the future
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx28" id="paren.26"/>.<def-list>
            <def-item><term>Atmosphere</term><def>

      <p id="d1e600">The atmospheric component <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx48" id="paren.27"><named-content content-type="pre">ECBilt,</named-content></xref> is a spectral
global quasi-geostrophic model, with T21 truncation,
three vertical layers at 800, 500, and 200 hPa, and a time step of
4 h. The quasi-geostrophic structure of the model limits its
ability to simulate equatorial variability and, hence, atmospheric
interactions between the tropics and higher latitudes. To partially compensate for this, it has additional ageostrophic
terms to improve the representation of Hadley cell
dynamics <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx48" id="paren.28"/>.
Precipitation is computed from the precipitable water of the first
layer according to a precipitation threshold for relative humidity (default 85%).
The model contains simple schemes for short-wave and long-wave radiation,
with radiative cloud cover prescribed by default
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx30" id="paren.29"/>.</p>
            </def></def-item>
            <def-item><term>Ocean</term><def>

      <p id="d1e620">The oceanic component (CLIO – Coupled Large-scale Ice
Ocean) is a 3-D primitive equation model with Boussinesq and
hydrostatic approximations.  The model is discretized horizontally
on a 3<inline-formula><mml:math id="M11" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M12" display="inline"><mml:mo>×</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 3<inline-formula><mml:math id="M13" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> Arakawa B-grid, with 20 vertical
levels on a <inline-formula><mml:math id="M14" display="inline"><mml:mi>z</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> coordinate.  This coarse-resolution enables CLIO to
run fast enough for glacial cycle simulations.
A free surface and a parameterization of down-sloping currents
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx11" id="paren.30"/>
enables CLIO to receive freshwater fluxes and
capture some of their impacts on dense water flows off continental shelves.
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx26" id="text.31"/> describe the
model in detail. A major limitation of this model (and challenge for
many GCMs) for paleoclimate studies is that the bathymetry and land
mask can not be changed during a transient run (specifically, there is
no available nor described implementation that can do so).</p>
            </def></def-item>
            <def-item><term>Sea ice</term><def>

      <p id="d1e668">The sea ice component of CLIO is an updated version of
the <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx18" id="text.32"/>
dynamic–thermodynamic sea ice model. A visco-plastic rheology
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx34" id="paren.33"/> is used for horizontal stress balance.  The
thermodynamic component of the sea ice model considers
sub-grid sea ice and snow cover thickness distribution, in addition to ice and snow
sensible and latent heat storage.</p>
            </def></def-item>
            <def-item><term>Vegetation</term><def>

      <p id="d1e683">VECODE is a
dynamic terrestrial vegetation model with a simplified terrestrial carbon cycle
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx10" id="paren.34"/>.
The model simulates the dynamics of two plant functional types
(trees and grasses), in addition to deserts, and evolves their
grid-cell fractions. These fractions are determined
by the contemporaneous<?pagebreak page3886?> climate state and terrestrial carbon pool.
More details about the model can be found in
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx9 bib1.bibx10" id="text.35"/>.</p>
            </def></def-item>
          </def-list>LOVECLIM has been tested for both interglacial and glacial
contexts. <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx47" id="text.36"/> found
that the large-scale changes in climate simulated by LOVECLIM for the
last interglacial were in approximate agreement with those indicated by
available proxies (differences in the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M15" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M16" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C range for
summer, and the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M17" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> to 0 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M18" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C range for winter).  These changes were also
similar to that from a full complexity atmosphere–ocean general
circulation model (CCSM3). However, due to stronger polar
amplification in LOVECLIM, smaller sea ice extent and higher surface
temperatures are simulated in LOVECLIM compared to CCSM3 for the
interglacial.</p>
      <p id="d1e737">During the Last Glacial Maximum, LOVECLIM overestimates both the
minimum and maximum Southern Hemisphere sea ice cover compared to
paleo-proxy data, while CCSM only overestimates the minimum sea ice
extent <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx58" id="paren.37"/>.
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx57" id="text.38"/> also found a reasonable
agreement between the atmospheric and oceanic estimates of LOVECLIM and
proxy data during the LGM (e.g., disappearance of much of the PD
Siberian boreal forest, seasonal sea-ice extent, sea surface temperature). However, the Atlantic deep ocean
circulation is stronger in their simulation, which opposes the general
inference of weaker AMOC during the LGM.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS2">
  <title>GSM</title>
      <p id="d1e752">The GSM is built around a thermo-mechanically coupled ice sheet model.
It includes a 4 km deep permafrost-resolving bed thermal model
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx67" id="paren.39"/>, fast surface drainage and lake solver <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx66" id="paren.40"/>,
visco-elastic bedrock deformation <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx64" id="paren.41"/>, positive degree day
surface mass balance with temperature dependent degree-day
coefficients derived from energy balance modelling results
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx65" id="paren.42"/>, sub-grid ice flow and surface mass balance for grid cells with incomplete ice cover
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx46" id="paren.43"/>, and various ice calving schemes for both marine and
proglacial lake contexts <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx68" id="paren.44"/>. For the results herein, ice
shelves are treated using a crude shallow ice approximation with fast
sliding. The GSM is run at a 0.5<inline-formula><mml:math id="M19" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> longitude by 0.25<inline-formula><mml:math id="M20" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> latitude grid resolution.</p>
      <p id="d1e792">The GSM has three new features that have not been previously
documented. First, ice calving has been upgraded to the more
physically based scheme from <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx13" id="text.45"/>. However, our implementation
imposes the additional condition that the ice cliff failure mechanism is only
imposed at ice marginal grid cells.
Second, a temperature-dependent sub-shelf melt scheme that also depends on adjacent
subglacial meltwater discharge from the grounded ice sheet has been
added. The melt is proportional to the water temperature to the power
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M21" display="inline"><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.6</mml:mn></mml:math></inline-formula> and to proximal subglacial meltwater discharge following the
Greenland fjord modelling results of
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx75" id="text.46"/>.
We also impose a quadratic dependence on ice thickness to concentrate sub-shelf melt
near deep grounding lines in accord with the results of process
modelling <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx36" id="paren.47"><named-content content-type="pre">e.g.,</named-content></xref>. Finally, a first-order
approximation to geoidal deflection is now included. Details of these
schemes will be in an upcoming submission that fully describes the revised GSM.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS3">
  <title>Model initialization</title>
      <p id="d1e819">For the results herein, PD and glacial inception model runs
are initiated with PD ice sheet thickness. The initial
bed-thermal temperature field is set to the PD resultant
field from a mix of best-fit past calibrated and ongoing calibration
model runs (i.e., without LOVECLIM as in <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx68" id="altparen.48"/> for North
America).</p>
      <p id="d1e825">To initialize the temperature field of existing ice sheets, results
from previous transient runs are usually used in the GSM. However,
this does not work for a cold start from PD fields, as the
PD ice thickness fields will not line up fully with model
results. As such, the ice temperature field is initially linearly
interpolated from surface temperature to a basal temperature of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M22" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M23" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C.
This enforces a frozen base to ensure a smooth spin-up and
also provides warm enough ice to generate significant ice
velocities. Ice velocity fields are then computed. The ice
thermodynamics are subsequently partially spun-up over 5000 years (with
fully coupled bed-thermal evolution). When the results of pre-Eemian
Greenland and Antarctic calibrations become available, this will be
used to initialize the respective Eemian ice sheet temperature and ice
thickness fields.</p>
      <p id="d1e847">Glacial inception surface topography is also offset from PD
by the amount required to remove PD topographic discrepancies
(to observed) from some past best fit calibration model runs.</p>
      <p id="d1e850">As detailed below, the climate model is spun-up over an ensemble parameter
dependent time interval prior to onset of the coupled model run.</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3">
  <title>Coupling</title>
      <p id="d1e860">The coupler is designed to regrid and exchange data between the
ice sheet model (GSM) and LOVECLIM (ECBilt and CLIO) in both
directions with minimal adjustment to the model code.
Figure <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F1"/> displays all the fields the coupler transfers
between different component models and the processes involved.</p>
      <p id="d1e865">Due to the computational costs of coupling and trivial variations of
ice sheets over small timescales, the ice model and the climate model
run for a certain number of years before receiving updated fields from
the other model. However, using large coupling time steps
can also introduce errors into the results. To test the effect of the
coupling time step on ice sheet<?pagebreak page3887?> evolution, we used three different
coupling steps (100 years, 20 years, and 10 years) to simulate the last glacial
inception starting at 120 ka. With identical
boundary and initial conditions for all three simulations, runs with 10-year and 20-year coupling
steps have less than a maximum of 3 % difference in ice volume
(Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F2"/>).
However, the 100-year coupling-step run (red line in
Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F2"/>) strongly
diverges from the other two during the retreat phase. This ice volume
divergence is mostly due to a thinner ice in North America (NA) and
Eurasia (EA), and a less southern extent of the NA ice sheet. A weaker
response with longer coupling time steps is expected given the delay
in updating climate and ice boundary conditions for the GSM and
LOVECLIM, respectively. Given these results, we choose 20 years as the coupling step for all
of our ensemble simulations (due in part to the not insignificant
overhead with the coupler as currently coded/scripted).</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F1"><caption><p id="d1e874">Components of the climate system and the interactions between
them included in the coupled model. The section numbers denote the section of this paper in which each process is described in detail. Atmospheric fields
passed from ECBilt to the GSM are monthly climatologies.</p></caption>
        <?xmltex \igopts{width=241.848425pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://gmd.copernicus.org/articles/11/3883/2018/gmd-11-3883-2018-f01.png"/>

      </fig>

      <p id="d1e883">The ice sheet model exchanges data with both the atmosphere and the
ocean models at the end of each coupling step. The fields that are passed are described in detail below.</p>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS1">
  <title>Atmosphere to ice</title>
      <p id="d1e892">At the end of each coupling time step, the coupler receives climate
fields averaged over the last 10 years from ECBilt and converts them to monthly-mean values. These
fields include the following:
<list list-type="bullet"><list-item>
      <p id="d1e897">2 m near surface air temperature and standard deviation;</p></list-item><list-item>
      <p id="d1e901">vertical 2 m temperature gradient;</p></list-item><list-item>
      <p id="d1e905">precipitation;</p></list-item><list-item>
      <p id="d1e909">evaporation;</p></list-item><list-item>
      <p id="d1e913">and latitudinal and longitudinal components of wind and the standard deviation of
each.</p></list-item></list>
LOVECLIM computes both 2 m near surface air temperatures (T2m) and
surface (or skin) temperatures. We note at least one previous study
has indicated the usage of LOVECLIM surface temperature for ice sheet
modelling contexts <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx59" id="paren.49"/>,
which we find problematic. Surface melt determination using positive
degree days requires the T2m, and rain/snow fraction determination
will be more accurately estimated with the T2m than the surface temperature. Ice
thermodynamics would properly use the surface temperature, but this can be
alleviated in part if the ice sheet model limits surface temperatures to
0 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M24" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C over ice and snow for the ice thermodynamics.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F2"><caption><p id="d1e931">Total ice volume in sea level equivalent (m) at last
glacial inception, synchronously coupled with 100-year, 20-year, and 10-year
time steps.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=241.848425pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://gmd.copernicus.org/articles/11/3883/2018/gmd-11-3883-2018-f02.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e940">Given the simplified boundary layer physics of LOVECLIM, it may be
that some weighted average of its T2m and surface temperature is a
more appropriate estimate of “true” 2 m temperature. As shown in
the Supplement, a raw average gives somewhat better overall fits to
ERA40 2 m temperatures over Greenland and Antarctica but worse fits for
July over North America and especially Eurasia using the default
LOVECLIM tuning. Given these mixed results (and the possibility that
after retuning the average of T2m and surface temperature would give
better fits), we provide an option in the coupler to extract this
average temperature from LOVECLIM instead of T2m.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F3" specific-use="star"><caption><p id="d1e946">Vertical temperature lapse rate calculated by the coupler
at PD over NA in <bold>(a)</bold> February and
<bold>(b)</bold> July. <bold>(c)</bold> Shows the ice thickness difference
between dynamic and constant 6.5 K km<inline-formula><mml:math id="M25" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> lapse rate (control) runs
after running for 2 kyr, starting from the same 110 ka configuration. Black contours
show the ice thickness in the control run. Thick black and green
contours show the ice margin in the control and dynamic lapse rate
run, respectively.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=355.659449pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://gmd.copernicus.org/articles/11/3883/2018/gmd-11-3883-2018-f03.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e976">The large difference in spatial resolution of the two models
necessitates horizontal and vertical downscaling of the climatic
fields. The GSM receives climatic fields on the<?pagebreak page3888?> LOVECLIM grid, and
downscales them to its own grid resolution using bilinear
interpolation.</p>
      <p id="d1e979">The downscaled standard deviation of temperature (using 4-hourly ECBilt data
for each month averaged over the last 10 years of each coupling time step)
is used to compute monthly positive degree days,
with the usual assumption of a Gaussian distribution around the
monthly mean. This is opposed to the traditional practice of assuming
a constant value, usually between 5 and 7 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M26" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F4"><caption><p id="d1e993">Impact of advective precipitation downscaling inclusion in
the coupled model; NA ice thickness difference at 110 ka between
simulations with and without the advective precipitation method.
Contours show the ice thickness in the control run. Thick black
and green contours show the ice margin in the control and
advective precipitation run, respectively. LOVECLIM parameters
are set to default values.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=241.848425pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://gmd.copernicus.org/articles/11/3883/2018/gmd-11-3883-2018-f04.png"/>

        </fig>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F5" specific-use="star"><caption><p id="d1e1004">The upstream
ocean temperature profile sites and corresponding downstream sectors
assigned to these profiles for ocean–ice coupling in
<bold>(a)</bold> NA and Greenland and <bold>(b)</bold> EA.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=384.112205pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://gmd.copernicus.org/articles/11/3883/2018/gmd-11-3883-2018-f05.png"/>

        </fig>

<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS1.SSS1">
  <title>Vertical temperature gradient</title>
      <p id="d1e1025">Large grid resolution differences between ECBilt and the GSM result in
surface elevation differences between the two models, especially in places with
steep topography. The altitude dependence of temperature in such
regions can drastically affect the type of precipitation and surface
mass balance of the ice sheet. Therefore, in addition to horizontally
downscaling the temperature from LOVECLIM to the GSM, a vertical
correction of temperature is required.</p>
      <p id="d1e1028">By monitoring 25 sites spread over a 15 650 km<inline-formula><mml:math id="M27" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> area
and with an altitude range from 130 to 2010 m on the Prince of Wales
Icefield for 2 years,
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx43" id="text.50"/> found a mean
daily vertical surface temperature gradient of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M28" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4.1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> K km<inline-formula><mml:math id="M29" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, with
an average summer gradient of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M30" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4.3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> K km<inline-formula><mml:math id="M31" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>. These values are less
than the standard mean free-air temperature lapse rate that is often
used for extrapolations of sea level temperature to higher altitudes
(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M32" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">6.5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> K km<inline-formula><mml:math id="M33" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>) <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx24 bib1.bibx1 bib1.bibx52" id="paren.51"><named-content content-type="pre">e.g.,</named-content></xref>.
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx43" id="text.52"/> also find a
vertical surface temperature gradient of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M34" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">6</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M35" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">7</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> K km<inline-formula><mml:math id="M36" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> on steep
regions in summer, and around <inline-formula><mml:math id="M37" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> K km<inline-formula><mml:math id="M38" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> in regions where
northerly anticyclonic flow is more common. In addition,
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx23" id="text.53"/> find
significant spatio-temporal variations in vertical temperature
gradients across four glaciers in the Canadian High Arctic.</p>
      <?pagebreak page3889?><p id="d1e1176">The GSM uses the near-surface vertical T2m gradient calculated
by the coupler at the end of each time step to downscale the
temperature field over its high-resolution grid.
In each LOVECLIM grid cell, the coupler first determines the
highest and lowest elevations from the GSM topography constrained by
the cell's boundary. Next, the T2m for these two
elevations is calculated using the inherited scheme from the LOVECLIM
atmospheric model <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx59" id="paren.54"><named-content content-type="pre">as detailed in</named-content></xref>. The resulting
temperature and elevation difference between the two points
is then used to calculate the temperature lapse rate in that
LOVECLIM grid cell.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F6" specific-use="star"><caption><p id="d1e1186">Ice thickness difference from the control run
(dynamic ocean temperature) at 108 ka for three test runs starting from the same 110 ka control run restart. The three test runs are as follows: <bold>(a)</bold> PD ocean temperature
run, <bold>(b)</bold> the fixed ocean temperature at <inline-formula><mml:math id="M39" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M40" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C run, and
<bold>(c)</bold> the temperature averaged over ocean layers run. Contours
show the ice thickness in the control run. Thick black and green
contours show the ice margin in the control and the other run in each of the panels,
respectively.</p></caption>
            <?xmltex \igopts{width=426.791339pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://gmd.copernicus.org/articles/11/3883/2018/gmd-11-3883-2018-f06.png"/>

          </fig>

      <p id="d1e1224">Figure <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F3"/>a and b show the
present-day vertical T2m lapse rate calculated by the coupler for
summer and winter. The derived lapse rate has strong spatial and
temporal variation over NA and Greenland. The impact of this
variation is shown in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F3"/>c. Starting from the
same 110 ka configuration, the difference in ice thickness after 2 kyr
between a dynamic temperature lapse rate run and a control run
(default LOVECLIM parameters) with a 6.5 K km<inline-formula><mml:math id="M41" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> lapse rate can
reach over 1 km.</p>
      <p id="d1e1243">Evaluating the appropriateness of our vertical temperature
downscaling approach is difficult, especially when considering
glacial/interglacial changes. Using a global climate model
(CCSM3), <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx16" id="text.55"/>
found significantly larger surface slope lapse rate values over
the Greenland ice sheet during the LGM compared to pre-industrial
values (February mean increase of about 3.7 K km<inline-formula><mml:math id="M42" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> and about 0.9 K km<inline-formula><mml:math id="M43" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>
for July). In contrast, our T2m mean LGM lapse rate over
Greenland is 0.8 K km<inline-formula><mml:math id="M44" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> stronger for February and
0.2 K km<inline-formula><mml:math id="M45" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> weaker for July compared to that of the PD. However, neither lapse
rate is an accurate a priori choice for vertical
downscaling. A need remains for a multi-resolution modelling study
to compare a “true” downscaling vertical temperature gradient
with the various possible lapse rates that can be derived from a
single resolution model.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F7" specific-use="star"><caption><p id="d1e1299">The impact of meltwater runoff inclusion in the coupled model;
<bold>(a)</bold> total ice volume evolution at glacial inception with
(green) and without (red) dynamic meltwater routing, and
<bold>(b)</bold> NA ice thickness difference at 110 ka with and without
dynamic runoff routing. Contours show the ice thickness in the
simulation without dynamic runoff routing. Thick black and green
contours show the ice margin in the control and dynamic runoff routing run, respectively.</p></caption>
            <?xmltex \igopts{width=355.659449pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://gmd.copernicus.org/articles/11/3883/2018/gmd-11-3883-2018-f07.png"/>

          </fig>

</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS1.SSS2">
  <title>Advective precipitation downscaling</title>
      <p id="d1e1320">LOVECLIM calculates evaporation, rain, and snow for each grid cell
based on its coarse-resolution surface topography and temperature
fields. These fields require downscaling to the higher resolution GSM
grid. A common approach is to linearly interpolate both precipitation
and evaporation fields onto the high-resolution ice sheet model grid,
calculate the net precipitation amount, and finally determine the
amount of rain and snow for each grid cell using the downscaled
temperature. However, linear interpolation does not correct the damped
orographic forcing due to a coarse-resolution climate model grid.
Here, we apply a new approach to precipitation downscaling that also
accounts for orographic forcing at the ice sheet grid resolution.</p>
      <p id="d1e1323">The scheme assumes that orographic precipitation
effects for upslope winds will be proportional to the vertical
velocity induced by the surface slope and, therefore, to the dot product
of the horizontal wind velocity and surface slope (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M46" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mtext>GSM</mml:mtext></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M47" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mtext>ATM</mml:mtext></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) with the latter given
by

                  <disp-formula specific-use="align" content-type="numbered"><mml:math id="M48" display="block"><mml:mtable displaystyle="true"><mml:mtr><mml:mtd><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true" class="stylechange"/></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true" class="stylechange"/><mml:msub><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mtext>GSM</mml:mtext></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">u</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>x</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>y</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mtext>month</mml:mtext><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>k</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">u</mml:mi><mml:mo>⋅</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">∇</mml:mi><mml:mi>h</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mtr><mml:mlabeledtr id="Ch1.E1"><mml:mtd/><mml:mtd><mml:mstyle class="stylechange" displaystyle="true"/></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle class="stylechange" displaystyle="true"/><mml:msub><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mtext>ATM</mml:mtext></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">u</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>x</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>y</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mtext>month</mml:mtext><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>k</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">u</mml:mi><mml:mo>⋅</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">∇</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi>h</mml:mi><mml:mtext>ATM</mml:mtext></mml:msub><mml:mo>.</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mlabeledtr></mml:mtable></mml:math></disp-formula></p>
      <?pagebreak page3890?><p id="d1e1453">The <inline-formula><mml:math id="M49" display="inline"><mml:mi>k</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> in the above equations indexes a representative range of wind vectors <inline-formula><mml:math id="M50" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">u</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>x</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>y</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mtext>month</mml:mtext><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>k</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> for each month.
To simplify the coupling and still capture wind variation, we use monthly climatologies of mean wind
velocity and its standard deviation in the determination of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M51" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mtext>GSM</mml:mtext></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M52" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mtext>ATM</mml:mtext></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. We compute the advective
precipitation correction factor (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M53" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi>k</mml:mi><mml:mtext>p</mml:mtext></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) using the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M54" display="inline"><mml:mi>S</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>'s as a function of mean
and mean <inline-formula><mml:math id="M55" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> one standard deviation. We then sum over these factors with appropriate weights (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M56" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>W</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>k</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) for a
Gaussian distribution. This correction is based either on the ratio of the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M57" display="inline"><mml:mi>S</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> terms for <inline-formula><mml:math id="M58" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mtext>ATM</mml:mtext></mml:msub><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
(i.e., upslope winds) or on their difference (to transition into precipitation shadowing). In detail, with the inclusion
of a regularization term (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M59" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">μ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>, that governs the transition to precipitation shadowing) and bounds (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M60" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mtext>pmin</mml:mtext></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M61" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mtext>pmax</mml:mtext></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>),
this takes the following form:

                  <disp-formula specific-use="align"><mml:math id="M62" display="block"><mml:mtable displaystyle="true"><mml:mtr><mml:mtd><mml:mstyle class="stylechange" displaystyle="true"/></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true" class="stylechange"/><mml:mi>k</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mtr><mml:mtr><mml:mtd><mml:mstyle class="stylechange" displaystyle="true"/></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle class="stylechange" displaystyle="true"/><mml:msub><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mtext>ATM</mml:mtext></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>x</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>y</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mtext>month</mml:mtext><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>k</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn><mml:mo>:</mml:mo><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.25em"/><mml:mspace width="0.25em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mspace width="0.25em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mspace width="0.25em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.25em"/><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi>k</mml:mi><mml:mtext>p</mml:mtext></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>x</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>y</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mtext>month</mml:mtext><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>k</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mtr><mml:mtr><mml:mtd><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true" class="stylechange"/></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true" class="stylechange"/><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mtext>MIN</mml:mtext><mml:mfenced open="[" close="]"><mml:mrow><mml:mtext>MAX</mml:mtext><mml:mfenced close=")" open="("><mml:mrow><mml:mspace width="0.33em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mtext>GSM</mml:mtext></mml:msub><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">μ</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mtext>ATM</mml:mtext></mml:msub><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">μ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mtext>pmin</mml:mtext></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mtext>pmax</mml:mtext></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:mi>W</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>k</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mtr><mml:mtr><mml:mtd><mml:mstyle class="stylechange" displaystyle="true"/></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true" class="stylechange"/><mml:msub><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mtext>ATM</mml:mtext></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>x</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>y</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mtext>month</mml:mtext><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>k</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>≤</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn><mml:mo>:</mml:mo><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.25em"/><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.25em"/><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.25em"/><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.25em"/><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.25em"/><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi>k</mml:mi><mml:mtext>p</mml:mtext></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>x</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>y</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mtext>month</mml:mtext><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>k</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mtr><mml:mtr><mml:mtd><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true" class="stylechange"/></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle class="stylechange" displaystyle="true"/><?xmltex \hack{\hbox\bgroup\fontsize{9.5}{9.5}\selectfont$\displaystyle}?><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mtext>MIN</mml:mtext><mml:mfenced close="]" open="["><mml:mrow><mml:mtext>MAX</mml:mtext><mml:mfenced open="(" close=")"><mml:mrow><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.33em"/><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mtext>GSM</mml:mtext></mml:msub><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mtext>ATM</mml:mtext></mml:msub><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">μ</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">μ</mml:mi></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mtext>pmin</mml:mtext></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mtext>pmax</mml:mtext></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:mi>W</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>k</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>.</mml:mo><?xmltex \hack{$\egroup}?></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mtr></mml:mtable></mml:math></disp-formula></p>
      <p id="d1e1894">The loop is carried out for each point on the GSM grid. The net correction for each corresponding point on the lower
resolution atmospheric grid is then accumulated to generate a rescaling coefficient that is mapped back to each
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M63" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mi>p</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>x</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>y</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mtext>month</mml:mtext><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> on the GSM grid to ensure mass conservation. The scheme is currently implemented with <inline-formula><mml:math id="M64" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">μ</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.005</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M65" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mtext>pmin</mml:mtext></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M66" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mtext>pmax</mml:mtext></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">5.0</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>.</p>
      <p id="d1e1965">The new advective precipitation downscaling results in increased
ice sheet volume and southern extent for the North American
ice sheet during the inception phase. This increase is largest for
the southeastern sector of the ice sheet (Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F4"/>). Ice
thickness also decreases in some regions due to precipitation shadowing.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS1.SSS3">
  <title>No bias correction</title>
      <p id="d1e1976">Studies from <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx28" id="text.56"/>, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx41" id="text.57"/>,
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx53" id="text.58"/>,
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx74" id="text.59"/>, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx57" id="text.60"/>,
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx72" id="text.61"/>,
and  <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx49" id="text.62"/> demonstrate LOVECLIM's overall ability to simulate
the last millennium, the Holocene, and the Last Glacial Maximum (LGM)
climates in agreement with observed and proxy records. However, the
model still suffers from a high temperature bias at low
latitudes, an overly symmetric distribution of precipitation between the
two hemispheres, an overestimation of precipitation and vegetation
cover in the subtropics, weak atmospheric circulation, and an
overestimation of the ocean heat uptake over the last decades
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx29" id="paren.63"/>.</p>

<?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T2" specific-use="star"><caption><p id="d1e2007">Ensemble parameters that are varied in the historical transient simulation ensemble.
Column 2: the distribution of parameter values versus their range for each parameter.
Column 3: change in 1950–1980 CE mean summer 2 m temperature and winter precipitation
over four selected regions when each parameter is varied independently from its minimum to its maximum value.
In each sensitivity run, all the other parameters are fixed to LOVECLIM default values, with a spin-up length of 4000 years,
simple upscaling method, default LOVECLIM cloud radiative forcing, a start year of 1500 CE, and a dynamic vertical temperature lapse rate.</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><oasis:tgroup cols="6">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="left" colsep="1"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="4" colname="col4" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="5" colname="col5" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="6" colname="col6" align="left"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row>

         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" colname="col1" morerows="2">Parameter</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Range</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Temperature and</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>

         <oasis:entry colname="col5">Range</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col6">Temperature and</oasis:entry>

       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>

         <oasis:entry colname="col2">and</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col3">precipitation</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col4">Parameter</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col5">and</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col6">precipitation</oasis:entry>

       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">

         <oasis:entry colname="col2">distribution</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col3">sensitivity</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>

         <oasis:entry colname="col5">distribution</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col6">sensitivity</oasis:entry>

       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">

         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Snow albedo</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><?xmltex \igopts{width=56.905512pt}?><inline-graphic xlink:href="https://gmd.copernicus.org/articles/11/3883/2018/gmd-11-3883-2018-g03.png"/></oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><?xmltex \igopts{width=56.905512pt}?><inline-graphic xlink:href="https://gmd.copernicus.org/articles/11/3883/2018/gmd-11-3883-2018-g12.png"/></oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col4">Bare ice albedo</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><?xmltex \igopts{width=56.905512pt}?><inline-graphic xlink:href="https://gmd.copernicus.org/articles/11/3883/2018/gmd-11-3883-2018-g04.png"/></oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><?xmltex \igopts{width=56.905512pt}?><inline-graphic xlink:href="https://gmd.copernicus.org/articles/11/3883/2018/gmd-11-3883-2018-g13.png"/></oasis:entry>

       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">

         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Melting ice albedo</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><?xmltex \igopts{width=56.905512pt}?><inline-graphic xlink:href="https://gmd.copernicus.org/articles/11/3883/2018/gmd-11-3883-2018-g05.png"/></oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><?xmltex \igopts{width=56.905512pt}?><inline-graphic xlink:href="https://gmd.copernicus.org/articles/11/3883/2018/gmd-11-3883-2018-g14.png"/></oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col4">Precipitation threshold</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><?xmltex \igopts{width=56.905512pt}?><inline-graphic xlink:href="https://gmd.copernicus.org/articles/11/3883/2018/gmd-11-3883-2018-g06.png"/></oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><?xmltex \igopts{width=56.905512pt}?><inline-graphic xlink:href="https://gmd.copernicus.org/articles/11/3883/2018/gmd-11-3883-2018-g15.png"/></oasis:entry>

       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">

         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Spin-up length (years)</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><?xmltex \igopts{width=56.905512pt}?><inline-graphic xlink:href="https://gmd.copernicus.org/articles/11/3883/2018/gmd-11-3883-2018-g07.png"/></oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><?xmltex \igopts{width=56.905512pt}?><inline-graphic xlink:href="https://gmd.copernicus.org/articles/11/3883/2018/gmd-11-3883-2018-g16.png"/></oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col4">Start year (year AD)</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><?xmltex \igopts{width=56.905512pt}?><inline-graphic xlink:href="https://gmd.copernicus.org/articles/11/3883/2018/gmd-11-3883-2018-g08.png"/></oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><?xmltex \igopts{width=56.905512pt}?><inline-graphic xlink:href="https://gmd.copernicus.org/articles/11/3883/2018/gmd-11-3883-2018-g17.png"/></oasis:entry>

       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>

         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Upscaling method</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><?xmltex \igopts{width=56.905512pt}?><inline-graphic xlink:href="https://gmd.copernicus.org/articles/11/3883/2018/gmd-11-3883-2018-g09.png"/></oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><?xmltex \igopts{width=56.905512pt}?><inline-graphic xlink:href="https://gmd.copernicus.org/articles/11/3883/2018/gmd-11-3883-2018-g18.png"/></oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col4">Vertical temperature</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><?xmltex \igopts{width=56.905512pt}?><inline-graphic xlink:href="https://gmd.copernicus.org/articles/11/3883/2018/gmd-11-3883-2018-g10.png"/></oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><?xmltex \igopts{width=56.905512pt}?><inline-graphic xlink:href="https://gmd.copernicus.org/articles/11/3883/2018/gmd-11-3883-2018-g19.png"/></oasis:entry>

       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">

         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>

         <oasis:entry colname="col2"/>

         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>

         <oasis:entry colname="col4">gradient method</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col5"/>

         <oasis:entry colname="col6"/>

       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>

         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Cloud parameterization</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><?xmltex \igopts{width=56.905512pt}?><inline-graphic xlink:href="https://gmd.copernicus.org/articles/11/3883/2018/gmd-11-3883-2018-g11.png"/></oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><?xmltex \igopts{width=56.905512pt}?><inline-graphic xlink:href="https://gmd.copernicus.org/articles/11/3883/2018/gmd-11-3883-2018-g20.png"/></oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>

         <oasis:entry colname="col5"/>

         <oasis:entry colname="col6"/>

       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table></table-wrap>

      <p id="d1e2269">The extent to which these biases are due to the tuning of LOVECLIM
parameters and missing couplings with the rest<?pagebreak page3891?> of the Earth/climate
system is unclear. Therefore, we do not apply a bias correction to
atmospheric fields and instead examine the extent to which an ensemble
parameter sweep can reduce the bias. As detailed below, a reduction
in the PD regional temperature and precipitation bias occurs for various
members of our perturbed parameter ensemble.</p>
      <p id="d1e2272">The control run (with all LOVECLIM parameters set to their default
values, and other coupling parameters as described in the caption of
Table 2) shows the highest temperature bias in the “South NA”
region (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M67" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M68" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C), with slightly colder temperatures in the
“North NA” (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M69" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M70" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C). The temperature bias over EA is less significant,
and is also less latitude dependent (both “North EA” and
“South EA” are biased by <inline-formula><mml:math id="M71" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M72" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C). A reduction in the regional
temperature and precipitation bias is observed in various members of
our ensemble of simulations for the PD, as introduced below. The regional
temperature and precipitation bias relative to observed (Table <xref ref-type="table" rid="Ch1.T3"/>) over NA and EA
can reach zero for some ensemble members for both summer and
winter. Although there is no individual run with zero bias in all
the regions, a number of selected runs show reduced temperature biases
(between <inline-formula><mml:math id="M73" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and 1 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M74" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C) in all four regions compared to that of the
control run.</p>

<?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T3" specific-use="star"><caption><p id="d1e2358">The sieved sub-ensemble and observed mean summer and winter
2 m temperature and precipitation averaged over four
latitudinal bands for the 1950–1980 CE interval.</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><oasis:tgroup cols="6">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="center"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="4" colname="col4" align="center" colsep="1"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="5" colname="col5" align="center"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="6" colname="col6" align="center"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row>

         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" colname="col1" morerows="2">Zone</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col2"/>

         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" namest="col3" nameend="col4" colsep="1">Summer </oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" namest="col5" nameend="col6">Winter </oasis:entry>

       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>

         <oasis:entry colname="col2"/>

         <oasis:entry colname="col3">T2m</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col4">Precipitation</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col5">T2m</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col6">Precipitation</oasis:entry>

       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">

         <oasis:entry colname="col2"/>

         <oasis:entry colname="col3">(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M75" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C)</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col4">(mm month<inline-formula><mml:math id="M76" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>)</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col5">(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M77" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C)</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col6">(mm month<inline-formula><mml:math id="M78" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>)</oasis:entry>

       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>

         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" colname="col1" morerows="1">NorthNA</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Model ens.</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M79" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">6.3</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M80" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">54.3</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">14.3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M81" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">25.2</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3.9</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M82" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">20.0</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">5.4</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>

       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">

         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Observation</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col3">4.7</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col4">30.6</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M83" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">27.9</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col6">10.5</oasis:entry>

       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>

         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" colname="col1" morerows="1">SouthNA</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Model ens.</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M84" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">18.0</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M85" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">85.2</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">19.7</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M86" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">7.7</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M87" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">56.4</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">5.3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>

       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">

         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Observation</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col3">15.0</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col4">68.5</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M88" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">9.7</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col6">49.4</oasis:entry>

       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>

         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" colname="col1" morerows="1">NorthEA</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Model ens.</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M89" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">5.6</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M90" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">33.4</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">5.6</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M91" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">8.3</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">5.5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M92" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">16.7</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">6.9</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>

       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">

         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Observation</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col3">3.3</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col4">27.2</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M93" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">14.0</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col6">8.9</oasis:entry>

       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>

         <oasis:entry colname="col1" morerows="1">SouthEA</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Model ens.</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M94" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">14.9</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.8</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M95" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">60.7</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10.4</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M96" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3.2</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.0</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M97" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">55.1</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10.4</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>

       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>

         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Observation</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col3">12.9</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col4">59.7</oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M98" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">5.6</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>

         <oasis:entry colname="col6">43.5</oasis:entry>

       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table></table-wrap>

</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS2">
  <title>Ocean to ice: sub-shelf melt</title>
      <p id="d1e2843">Sub-ice shelf melt is a challenge for paleo coupled ice sheet climate
modelling given the dependence on unresolved basin-scale
circulation. As a first-order approximation, we assume that upstream
ocean temperature at the same depth corresponds to the local sub-shelf
temperature. To facilitate<?pagebreak page3892?> fast and simplified coupling, given the
complexity of ocean grids in most ocean general circulation models, we
only extract upstream ocean temperature vertical profiles from
LOVECLIM at the end of each coupling time step for a number of chosen
index sites as indicated in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F5"/> and use these for downstream
marine sectors. We selected these
sites (seven over NA + Greenland and four over EA) by examining the PD ocean
temperature climatologies from CLIO (at various depths) while taking
ocean currents into account. Our site selection was predicated on
the constant bathymetry and land mask of CLIO and would need updating
for a model with dynamic land mask/bathymetry. The downstream masks for the profile
sites extend onto land where applicable when grounding line retreat
beyond the fixed ocean mask of CLIO (i.e., onto the land mask) is possible.</p>
      <p id="d1e2848">To test the impact of this regional disaggregation of ocean
temperatures, we generated three test cases: ocean temperature forcing
set to PD value, to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M99" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M100" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C, and to the contemporaneous average
across the above index sites. Starting from a 110 ka restart, all
three options have local ice thickness differences greater than 1 km
after 2 kyr compared to that with the standard coupling (Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F6"/>).</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS3">
  <title>Ice to atmosphere</title>
      <p id="d1e2878">Changes in both the topography and the ice mask can affect the global
circulation patterns by influencing the stationary waves and the
jet stream. At the end of each coupling time step, the coupler receives the
updated topography and ice thickness fields from the GSM. The
topography field is upscaled to the ECBilt grid and then
used for the next LOVECLIM run step. Given the large difference in grid resolution,
the choice of upscaling scheme is not clear a priori. Therefore, we have implemented three different
schemes to upscale the topography from the GSM high-resolution grid to
the ECBilt low-resolution grid.</p>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS3.SSS1">
  <title>Topography upscaling and ice mask</title>
      <p id="d1e2886"><def-list>
              <def-item><term>The simple average method</term><def>

      <p id="d1e2894">In this method, the coupler simply
calculates a weight for each high-resolution grid cell based on
the fraction of the cell located inside the coarse grid cell. These
weights are then used to calculate the average altitude of each
ECBilt cell from the GSM orography.</p>
              </def></def-item>
              <def-item><term>The envelope method</term><def>

      <p id="d1e2903">In the envelope method, a weighted standard
deviation of the altitude of all the GSM cells inside the ECBilt cell is
added to the simple average altitude from the previous method. The
envelope method works reasonably well to preserve the overall
topographic peaks, but it can introduce a phase shift in the terrain
field, broaden ridges, and raise the height of even relatively broad
valleys:

                        <disp-formula id="Ch1.Ex7"><mml:math id="M101" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle class="stylechange" displaystyle="true"/><mml:msub><mml:mi>H</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>j</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mover accent="true"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>H</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>j</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mo mathvariant="normal">‾</mml:mo></mml:mover><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ω</mml:mi><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>j</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>.</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>

                  Here, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M102" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>H</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>j</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the model terrain height, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M103" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ω</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> is a
predefined weighting factor (in our experiments 0.5), and
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M104" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>j</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the standard deviation at the model grid point.</p>
              </def></def-item>
              <def-item><term>The silhouette method</term><def>

      <?pagebreak page3893?><p id="d1e3002">The silhouette method combines the simple
average altitude with a silhouette height. The silhouette height is
defined as follows:

                        <disp-formula id="Ch1.Ex8"><mml:math id="M105" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle class="stylechange" displaystyle="true"/><mml:msub><mml:mi>H</mml:mi><mml:mtext>s</mml:mtext></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ω</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mi>H</mml:mi><mml:mtext>max</mml:mtext></mml:msub><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mfenced close=")" open="("><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ω</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:mfenced open="(" close=")"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>H</mml:mi><mml:mtext>sx</mml:mtext></mml:msub><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>H</mml:mi><mml:mtext>sy</mml:mtext></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced></mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>

                  where <inline-formula><mml:math id="M106" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>H</mml:mi><mml:mtext>max</mml:mtext></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the maximum height of all GSM grid cells
inside the ECBilt cell, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M107" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>H</mml:mi><mml:mtext>sx</mml:mtext></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M108" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>H</mml:mi><mml:mtext>sy</mml:mtext></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> are the average peak
heights obtained in each row and column of nested cells, and
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M109" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ω</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the predefined weight. The silhouette height is then
used to calculate the ECBilt cell altitude using:

                        <disp-formula id="Ch1.Ex9"><mml:math id="M110" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle class="stylechange" displaystyle="true"/><mml:mi>H</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ω</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mi>H</mml:mi><mml:mtext>s</mml:mtext></mml:msub><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mfenced close=")" open="("><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ω</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>H</mml:mi><mml:mtext>mean</mml:mtext></mml:msub><mml:mo>.</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula></p>

      <p id="d1e3152">Different combinations of the weighting factors <inline-formula><mml:math id="M111" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ω</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M112" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ω</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> will draw the gridded terrain analysis toward preserving
the peaks <inline-formula><mml:math id="M113" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mfenced close=")" open="("><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ω</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> or preserving the mean topographic height
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M114" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mfenced open="(" close=")"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ω</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, which allows a greater degree of freedom
to determine the model terrain analysis.</p>
              </def></def-item>
            </def-list></p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS3.SSS2">
  <title>Ice mask</title>
      <p id="d1e3219">Another important consideration in the ice sheet–atmospheric coupling is the
variation in ice extent, which changes the albedo calculated by ECBilt;
this affects the temperature field over the region and
globally. We used the ice thickness field generated by the GSM to
create the ice mask needed by ECBilt. To do so, the high-resolution
ice thickness field is first regridded to the ECBilt coarse-resolution
grid using one of the methods mentioned above. Any cell in the
resulting grid with more than 30 % ice coverage is then assumed to
be ice covered.</p>
      <p id="d1e3222">Our choice of a 30 % threshold (as opposed to say 50 %) was motivated by the following
logic. For any atmospheric grid cell covering an ice margin segment,
the temperature passed to the GSM should most importantly reflect ice
covered boundary conditions local to the ablations zone of the ice
sheet. Allowance for subgrid advection of warmer air masses from
adjacent ice-free land somewhat tempers this logic. Given potentially
significant impacts on critical ablation temperatures and therefore
ice sheet mass balance, this ice-fraction threshold deserves a
sensitivity analysis (in future work).</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS4">
  <title>Ice to ocean</title>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS4.SSS1">
  <title>Topographically self-consistent and mass conserving freshwater discharge</title>
      <p id="d1e3237">The melting of continental ice sheets provides a freshwater source to
the ocean that affects global sea level and the
AMOC. Dynamical ocean models indicate that the strength of the AMOC in the North
Atlantic is sensitive to the freshwater budget at the sites of the
formation of North Atlantic Deep Water
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx50" id="paren.64"/>.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F8" specific-use="star"><caption><p id="d1e3245">Selected north and south zones over North America and
Eurasia for PD sensitivity analysis.</p></caption>
            <?xmltex \igopts{width=341.433071pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://gmd.copernicus.org/articles/11/3883/2018/gmd-11-3883-2018-f08.png"/>

          </fig>

      <p id="d1e3254">As the GSM self-consistently computes surface drainage (while
conserving mass) for the evolving topography while LOVECLIM surface
drainage is hard-coded for PD topography, precipitation
within LOVECLIM is masked out where covered by the GSM grid. The
coupler then distributes GSM freshwater ocean discharge to
corresponding LOVECLIM ocean discharge grid cells. In areas where the GSM grid
edge is terrestrial, the GSM discharge is added to the corresponding
LOVECLIM grid cell for internal runoff routing. As topographic
gradient changes from glacial isostatic adjustment (GIA) are small
outside of the GSM grid, this scheme should give results close to what
would be achieved with a drainage solver using a topography globally
subject to GIA.</p>
      <p id="d1e3257">We describe the runoff routing in the coupler and the connection
between the GSM and LOVECLIM drainage basins in more detail in
the Supplement.</p>
      <p id="d1e3261">Figure <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F7"/>a provides an example of how the inclusion
of meltwater runoff in the coupled model improves ice sheet growth at
glacial inception. Although the impact is small at the first stages
of ice formation due to small ice volumes with negligible runoff rate
changes, ice in the simulation including runoff grows faster as it
gains more volume. The difference reaches its maximum at 110 ka, with
about 50 % more ice in the run with dynamic drainage routing,
including much thicker and more extensive ice over North America
(Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F7"/>b). Compared to the control run (no dynamic
drainage routing), the AMOC strength drops by 15 %, and the sea ice
extent shows an increase of 5 % in winter and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M115" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">15</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> % in summer (not
shown). The combination of these AMOC and sea ice changes yields a cooler summer in the
run with dynamic drainage routing, which results in less ice sheet melt.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS4.SSS2">
  <title>Bering Strait</title>
      <p id="d1e3284">The Bering Strait is a narrow strait with a present depth of approximately 50 m
between Siberia and Alaska, through which relatively fresh North
Pacific water is transported to the Arctic. From there, the North
Pacific water is transported to the Greenland Sea and the North Atlantic. This less-saline
water affects the upper ocean stratification and thus the strength of
deep ocean convection and the AMOC, which in turn, has impacts on
the global climate
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx61 bib1.bibx12 bib1.bibx35" id="paren.65"/>.</p>
      <p id="d1e3290">Due to the ice sheet growth and associated sea level lowering, the
Bering Strait was often closed during glacial cycles, limiting the
freshwater flow from the Pacific Ocean to the Arctic.
LOVECLIM does not explicitly compute the direct connection between the
Pacific and the Arctic through the Bering Strait, so the transport is
parameterized by a linear function of the cross-strait sea level
difference in accordance with geostrophic control theory
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx25" id="paren.66"/>. The coupler interpolates the Bering
Strait scaling at each coupling step between the PD value (0.3, 50 m
depth) and a closed strait (0.0, 0 m depth) using the relative
sea level at the Bering Strait as computed by the GSM. Given the shallowness
of the strait, the accuracy of the GSM in representing sea level changes
(based on its viscoelastic bedrock response and first-order Geoidal correction) plays a
potentially important role here.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F9"><caption><p id="d1e3298">Total ice volume at the last glacial inception with
the cloud parameterization (green) and the PD cloud cover forcing (red).</p></caption>
            <?xmltex \igopts{width=227.622047pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://gmd.copernicus.org/articles/11/3883/2018/gmd-11-3883-2018-f09.png"/>

          </fig>

</sec>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S4">
  <title>Ensemble parameter sensitivity analysis</title>
      <?pagebreak page3894?><p id="d1e3315">Ensemble parameters were initially chosen by judgement of their control of a
physical aspect of ice sheet–climate interaction (e.g., albedo) or
by their potential impact on the coupling between the ice sheet and the climate
(e.g., upscaling method) (Table <xref ref-type="table" rid="Ch1.T2"/>). This
choice was then validated by the following sensitivity analysis.</p>
      <p id="d1e3320">As the context of the model development is glacial inception and
deglaciation, we are interested in the ensemble performance for
climate metrics which control the growth and decay of the NH
ice sheets during these two stages. Therefore, we use
summer 2 m temperature and winter precipitation over land. To enable
comparison against observations, our sensitivity analysis is based on
transient runs over the historical interval (up to 1980 CE).</p>
      <p id="d1e3323">Since glacial inception and deglaciation are triggered at different
latitudes in NA and EA, we have divided each continent into diagnostic north and
south zones (called “NorthNA”, “SouthNA”, “NorthEA”, and
“SouthEA”). The sensitivity of the coupled model is
tracked for each individual zone. The “NorthNA” and
“SouthNA” zones cover latitude ranges of 65–75 and
40–60<inline-formula><mml:math id="M116" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N over NA, respectively. “NorthEA” and
“SouthEA” are defined over 70–80 and 55–70<inline-formula><mml:math id="M117" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N
latitude bands, respectively. The regional boundaries are illustrated
in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F8"/>.</p>
      <p id="d1e3346">The third column in Table <xref ref-type="table" rid="Ch1.T2"/> shows the
sensitivity of T2m and precipitation in the coupled
model to changes in each parameter through its range for four
different latitudinal bands over NA and EA averaged over the 1950–1980
interval. For easier comparison, all figures use the same temperature
and precipitation scales. The sensitivity to each
parameter for the four regions is different for temperature and precipitation. For
instance, switching between PD radiative cloud forcing and cloud
parameterization strongly affects both temperature and precipitation
over all regions, while changing the snow albedo has its strongest
impact on EA temperatures and precipitation (Table <xref ref-type="table" rid="Ch1.T2"/>). Each of
the ensemble parameters has an impact of at least 4 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M118" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C on temperature and/or
1 cm month<inline-formula><mml:math id="M119" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> on precipitation over the given parameter ranges. We take this as justification for their
continued use as ensemble parameters.</p>
      <p id="d1e3375">In the following subsections, we further describe the parameters used in the ensemble
simulation. Later, we will show that the chosen set of ensemble parameters is adequate
for bracketing the relevant (temperature and precipitation) fields of the climate system.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F10" specific-use="star"><caption><p id="d1e3380">The distribution of ice volume change over NA, EA, and Greenland,
between 1700 and 1980 CE in 2000 ensemble runs. Green bars represent
the selected 500 ensemble members, and red bars represent the
rest. SLE stands for sea level equivalent.</p></caption>
        <?xmltex \igopts{width=426.791339pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://gmd.copernicus.org/articles/11/3883/2018/gmd-11-3883-2018-f10.png"/>

      </fig>

<sec id="Ch1.S4.SS1">
  <title>Snow and ice albedo</title>
      <p id="d1e3394">Changes in the snow and ice area and type have an amplifying effect on
climate by modifying the surface albedo. During summer, the balance
between absorbed and reflected solar energy at the ice sheet surface
is the dominant factor controlling surface melt variability in the
ablation zone <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx71" id="paren.67"/>. The parameterization of the
surface albedo in LOVECLIM takes the state of the surface
(frozen or melting) and the thickness of the snow and ice covers into account
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx29" id="paren.68"/>. We include all types of snow<?pagebreak page3895?> and
ice albedo (i.e., snow, melting snow, and bare ice) in our ensemble
parameter set.</p>
      <p id="d1e3403">The snow albedo, bare ice albedo, and melting ice albedo rows in Table <xref ref-type="table" rid="Ch1.T2"/> show
the range of albedo values for each type and their climate sensitivity. Increasing snow albedo
results in a reduction of winter precipitation over all four regions with an
extended effect over summer temperatures, as expected. However, the
same feedback is not as straightforward for bare ice albedo and
melting ice albedo. Although the increase in bare ice albedo shows an expected
cooling effect over all regions with a smaller influence on
precipitation, an increase in melting ice albedo causes all regions to
get between 4 and 6 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M120" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C warmer and increases the winter
precipitation.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S4.SS2">
  <title>Climate initialization/spin-up</title>
      <p id="d1e3423">Before starting a coupled transient climate simulation, it is
necessary to allow the atmosphere and ocean to adjust to the initial
boundary conditions and external forcings. Model spin-up, and
therefore the initial state of the climate system, can be a major
source of uncertainty in climate modelling especially given
the millennial timescale of deep ocean circulation.</p>
      <p id="d1e3426">The general approach to spin-up the ocean is to run the ocean to an equilibrium state under fixed external
forcings <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx42 bib1.bibx37" id="paren.69"><named-content content-type="pre">e.g.,</named-content></xref>. However, as the climate system
is unlikely to ever be in equilibrium, this choice lacks justification. We include two parameters to control the initial state of
the system: LOVECLIM spin-up start year, and LOVECLIM spin-up length. All spin-ups are performed using transient orbital and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M121" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> forcings ranging from 3000
to 5000 years but without the GSM coupling. The combination of these two spin-up control
parameters results in slightly different coupled transient start
times, each with different initial ocean and atmosphere states. For the runs herein, we constrain the spin-up to end between 1400 and 1600 CE.
Increasing the spin-up length has a cooling and drying effect in the coupled model with PD boundary and
initial conditions, while starting the transient coupled run from
earlier years results in slightly warmer and wetter conditions (Table <xref ref-type="table" rid="Ch1.T2"/>).</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F11" specific-use="star"><caption><p id="d1e3449">Greenland ice thickness ensemble <bold>(a)</bold> mean, and
<bold>(b)</bold> standard deviation at PD.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=355.659449pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://gmd.copernicus.org/articles/11/3883/2018/gmd-11-3883-2018-f11.png"/>

        </fig>

</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S4.SS3">
  <title>Upscaling</title>
      <p id="d1e3470">The three different upscaling methods described in Sect. <xref ref-type="sec" rid="Ch1.S3.SS3.SSS1"/> are evenly distributed between ensemble members
as shown in Table <xref ref-type="table" rid="Ch1.T2"/>. By switching between three methods,
we calculate the highest temperature and precipitation changes over
four regions and plot them in the last column of Table <xref ref-type="table" rid="Ch1.T2"/>.
The highest temperature sensitivity to the upscaling method
is recorded in NorthNA followed by the NorthEA zones, and the
highest precipitation sensitivity is seen in the SouthEA zone.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S4.SS4">
  <title>Precipitation threshold</title>
      <p id="d1e3486">ECBilt only accounts for humidity, and thus precipitable water,
between the surface and the 500 hPa layer. Above 500 hPa, the
atmosphere is assumed to be dry, meaning that all the water transported by
atmospheric flows into this region precipitates. Below the 500 hPa
layer, ECBilt precipitates all the excess water above a fixed
threshold (default 0.83) multiplied by the vertically integrated
saturation specific humidity <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx29" id="paren.70"/>. This parameter
has the largest relative impact for NorthEA temperature (4 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M122" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C over the
parameter range equivalent to 60 % of mean).</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S4.SS5">
  <title>Cloud radiation parameterization</title>
      <p id="d1e3507">The representation of clouds is one of the largest
sources of uncertainty in models. They play an important role in regulating the
surface energy balance of ice sheets, with competing warming and
cooling effects at the surface through changes to short-wave and long-wave
radiative fluxes. The effect of ice sheets on cloud formation is also
significant. The growth of ice sheets results in tropospheric
cooling and a reduction in humidity. This colder and drier troposphere
displaces the upper tropospheric stratiform clouds downward, and
reduces<?pagebreak page3896?> the low level stratiform cloud cover around the ice sheets
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx33" id="paren.71"/>.</p>
      <p id="d1e3513">The total downward and upward long-wave radiative scheme in ECBilt is
a function of the vertical profile of the temperature, the
concentration of various GHGs, and the humidity, and is computed for
both clear sky and cloudy conditions. The radiation computed for each
grid cell is then the weighted average of these two conditions based on
the cloud coverage. The default ECBilt configuration prescribes radiative cloud coverage
to the PD ISCCP D2 dataset <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx60" id="paren.72"/>. The total
downward and upward short-wave radiative fluxes depend on the
transmissivity of the atmosphere, which also relies on the prescribed
cloud cover <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx29" id="paren.73"/>.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F12"><caption><p id="d1e3524">The distribution of global annual mean 2 m temperature
difference between ensemble members and observations averaged from
1950 to 1980 CE. Grey and green bars represent the 2000 ensemble
members and the top-performing 500 ensemble members, respectively.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=199.169291pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://gmd.copernicus.org/articles/11/3883/2018/gmd-11-3883-2018-f12.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e3533">Given the importance of cloud radiative feedbacks on ice sheet
evolution, the use of a prescribed PD cloud cover for paleoclimate
modelling lacks justification. Therefore, we have added a simple cloud parameterization scheme similar to the
precipitation parameterization scheme described in Sect. <xref ref-type="sec" rid="Ch1.S4.SS4"/>. The only difference here is the humidity
threshold for cloud formation, which is assumed to be 10 % less than
the precipitation threshold, allowing cloud cover without
precipitation. Including the dynamic cloud cover radiation feedback in the
coupled model slightly decreases the total ice volume at glacial
inception (Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F9"/>) through reduced
humidity during glacial conditions reducing the cloud cover.</p>
      <p id="d1e3541">As evident in the “Temperature and precipitation sensitivity” column in
Table <xref ref-type="table" rid="Ch1.T2"/>, regional temperature and precipitation
are sensitive to each of our ensemble parameters in
the coupled model. However, due to the non-linearity of the climate
system, the combined effect can be significantly different. In the
next section, we explore the coupled model response to all these
parameters in an ensemble of simulations.</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S5">
  <title>PD ensemble results</title>
      <p id="d1e3554">The fast runtime of the coupled model permitted an initial ensemble of
2000 PD simulations using the fully coupled GSM-LOVECLIM and varying
the model parameters described above. We chose the PD interval to
permit a comparison of the coupled model output against observational
data and to select a better fit sub-ensemble for transient glacial inception runs.
All simulations are spun-up using transient forcings (orbital,
Berger, 1978; Law Dome for recent <inline-formula><mml:math id="M123" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>,
Etheridge et al., 1998; and Dome C for pre-industrial to 5 ka <inline-formula><mml:math id="M124" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, Monnin et al., 2001)
for 3000 to 5000 years without the GSM coupled, followed by a
transient coupled run ending at year 1980. The ensemble parameter
values were generated via a Latin hypercube scheme with increased
weighting near LOVECLIM default values.</p>
      <p id="d1e3579">Given a priority to “bracket reality” and limitations of the
component models, we chose to not use climate characteristics for the
sub-ensemble filter. Our focus on coupled ice and climate and our
choice to avoid bias corrections led to a trial criteria based on ice
volume changes (between 1700<?pagebreak page3897?> and 1980 CE). Therefore, we used the PD
simulated NH ice sheet growth to sieve out
parameter vectors with major surface mass balance biases. We first
considered a less than 0.1 m SLE change in the ice
volume requirement for each of the three northern ice sheet regions. However,
this already fell below our target size of 500 simulations with NA
being the problematic region (Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F10"/>). Therefore, we
changed the criterion to be the 500 runs with the least amount of ice
volume change over each ice sheet. The sub-ensemble NA simulations
have an ice volume less than 0.15 m SLE (sea level equivalent) and ice volume changes for the
other two ice sheets are well below 0.1 m SLE
(Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F10"/>). Crucial to our “reality
bracketing”, there are about 80 sub-ensemble members with ice loss
over the given time interval.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F13" specific-use="star"><caption><p id="d1e3588"><bold>(a)</bold> The zonal average of the zonal component of the
200 hPa wind velocity, and <bold>(b)</bold> the meridional average of the
meridional component of the 200 hPa wind velocity over the
NH. Filled areas show the model ensemble mean and the two standard deviation range. Dashed lines represent
observational data. Blue is for winter, and red is for summer.</p></caption>
        <?xmltex \igopts{width=355.659449pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://gmd.copernicus.org/articles/11/3883/2018/gmd-11-3883-2018-f13.png"/>

      </fig>

      <p id="d1e3602">From here on, we focus on the 500 member sub-ensemble results. Figure <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F11"/> shows the Greenland region
ensemble mean thickness and standard deviation at PD. The largest ice thickness changes occur
at the southern margins of the Greenland ice sheet. Eastern NA ice
expansion is concentrated in the high Arctic (Ellesmere Island and
adjacent) where PD ice caps exist.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F14"><caption><p id="d1e3610">Maximum (March – blue) and minimum (September – red) sea ice
area ensemble mean <inline-formula><mml:math id="M125" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> one standard deviation. The vertical
lines represent observational 1981–2010 March and September mean
sea ice area within one standard deviation <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx73" id="paren.74"/>.</p></caption>
        <?xmltex \igopts{width=213.395669pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://gmd.copernicus.org/articles/11/3883/2018/gmd-11-3883-2018-f14.png"/>

      </fig>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F15" specific-use="star"><caption><p id="d1e3631"><bold>(a)</bold> Maximum AMOC strength at 26<inline-formula><mml:math id="M126" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N between 1966 and
1980 CE. The black solid line represents the ensemble mean; the dark blue area represents the ensemble
mean <inline-formula><mml:math id="M127" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> one standard deviation; the light blue area is bounded by
the simulations with the maximum and minimum AMOC strength (time averaged); and the dashed
line represents ORA-S3 <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx2" id="paren.75"/>. <bold>(b)</bold>, AMOC stream-function mean (filled
colours) and ensemble standard deviation (contour lines).</p></caption>
        <?xmltex \igopts{width=412.564961pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://gmd.copernicus.org/articles/11/3883/2018/gmd-11-3883-2018-f15.png"/>

      </fig>

<sec id="Ch1.S5.SS1">
  <?xmltex \opttitle{The 2\,m temperature and precipitation}?><title>The 2 m temperature and precipitation</title>
      <p id="d1e3670">The ensemble distribution of the annual mean global T2m
anomaly with respect to observations shows
that the majority of the ensemble members fall within <inline-formula><mml:math id="M128" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M129" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C
of observations (grey bars in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F12"/>). However, as ice sheet build up is a function of both temperature and
precipitation, most of the warm biased simulations fail to
maintain ice-free conditions over NA and EA during PD due to a high
winter precipitation bias (Table <xref ref-type="table" rid="Ch1.T3"/>).</p>
      <p id="d1e3696">Our four latitudinal bands defined in Sect. <xref ref-type="sec" rid="Ch1.S4"/>
(Table <xref ref-type="table" rid="Ch1.T3"/>) provide more relevant temperature
metrics for NH ice sheet contexts. All four regions have higher ensemble mean seasonal T2m and precipitation
compared to observations. However, the observations are covered well within
two standard deviations for all regions, and temperature is covered within one standard deviation
for most regions.</p>
      <p id="d1e3703">The seasonal cycle provides a partial test of a model's response to
orbital forcing on Milankovitch scales. The ensemble mean seasonal
cycle (difference between mean summer and mean winter) is within one
standard deviation of the reanalysis data for all regions and for both
temperature and precipitation (Table <xref ref-type="table" rid="Ch1.T3"/>).
Furthermore, aside from NorthEA, the diagnostic regions have a mean
difference between summer and winter ensemble temperatures within a
degree Celsius of that of the reanalysis climatology.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S5.SS2">
  <title>Northern Hemisphere jet stream</title>
      <p id="d1e3714">Jet stream latitude and oscillations have a strong control over
storm tracks and the boundary between polar and subtropical air
masses. Therefore, they are critical factors in controlling where and
when an ice sheet margin advances or retreats. Due to the low
vertical resolution of ECBilt, we compare the ensemble zonal mean of
the 200 hPa zonal wind (as opposed to the more usual 300 hPa
diagnostic level) with observations in winter and summer over NA and
EA (Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F13"/>a). The ensemble shows good agreement
in capturing the maximum zonal velocity, but there is a 10 to 15<inline-formula><mml:math id="M130" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> shift northward in the latitude of the jet in both
seasons. This is likely due to the reduced temperature gradient
between low and high latitude.</p>
      <p id="d1e3728">We also compare the 30–80<inline-formula><mml:math id="M131" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N meridionally averaged
meridional wind at 200 hPa of the ensemble mean and the
observations to diagnose the Rossby waves. In the
summer, the longitudes of the troughs and ridges from the Pacific Ocean
to the Atlantic Ocean largely match the reanalysis output within ensemble range (red line in
Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F13"/>b) with the largest discrepancies over
the Eurasian region. During the winter, although the general pattern
of the jet stream oscillations still agrees between the model and the
observations (troughs over Eurasia and North America), the mismatch
between ensemble members and observations becomes more significant given
the higher Rossby wave number of the model ensemble.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S5.SS3">
  <title>Sea ice</title>
      <p id="d1e3748">High latitude sea ice acts as an insulator for both heat and moisture
between the atmosphere and ocean, which are the two controlling factors for terrestrial
ice sheet surface mass balance. We use the area and minimum latitude extent of the
NH sea ice as relevant diagnostics. The general warm bias
of the ensemble is reflected in the reduced ice area of the ensemble for
both seasons, barely capturing the observed area within the one standard deviation range of the ensemble
(Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F14"/>).
Both March (maximum) and September (minimum) NH
sea ice areas show gradual decreases in the ensemble mean as the
greenhouse gas concentration increases in the model.</p>
      <p id="d1e3753">Our filter condition for our sub-ensemble still permits a wide
response of modelled components. For instance, averaging from 1950 to
1980 CE, the Pacific Ocean sea ice shows higher sensitivity to ensemble
parameters during its maximum seasonal extent than the Atlantic. The
sea ice minimum latitude in the Pacific ranges from 60 to
45<inline-formula><mml:math id="M132" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N (not shown), in comparison to the observed value of
60<inline-formula><mml:math id="M133" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx73" id="paren.76"/>.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S5.SS4">
  <title>AMOC</title>
      <p id="d1e3784">The AMOC transports
large amounts of heat and salinity between high and low latitudes.
Both paleoclimate proxy records <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx44" id="paren.77"/> and
climate model simulations <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx40" id="paren.78"/> show that
the AMOC experiences significant changes over a glacial cycle.</p>
      <p id="d1e3793">Our “bounding reality” criteria is not met for at least two AMOC features
of the sub-ensemble.
The PD<?pagebreak page3898?> ensemble mean AMOC strength is weaker than the reanalysis
data from European Centre of Medium-Range Weather Forecasts <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx2" id="paren.79"><named-content content-type="pre">ECMWF
ORA-S3,</named-content></xref>.
The temporal mean of the reanalysis data is only captured by the maximum
ensemble range (Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F15"/>a). The
ensemble mean shows a slight increase in the AMOC strength from 1965 to
1980 CE, which is not seen in ORA-S3. Furthermore, the
temporal variability of the CLIO AMOC lacks the strong amplitude of the low frequency component
of observations (as displayed by the maximum and minimum – time averaged – AMOC strength runs in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F15"/>a).</p>
      <p id="d1e3805">The maximum AMOC stream function
strength is seen around 50<inline-formula><mml:math id="M134" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N at 1 km depth. The ensemble
variance is also highest in the same region, in addition to 0<inline-formula><mml:math id="M135" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>
latitude at the same depth (Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F15"/>b).</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S6" sec-type="conclusions">
  <title>Conclusions</title>
      <p id="d1e3835">We have coupled an Earth system model of intermediate complexity
(LOVECLIM) with a 3-D thermomechanical coupled ice sheet systems model
(GSM) using LCice 1.0. The coupling efficiently captures most of the relevant feedbacks/interactions between
the ice sheet and the atmosphere and ocean models. Our coupled model
includes a parameterized sub-shelf melt using upstream ocean vertical
temperature profiles, a simple cloud parameterization scheme to
improve the radiative forcing representation in the atmosphere model,
a dynamical vertical temperature gradient, and a dynamic meltwater
runoff routing. We also introduce a new precipitation downscaling scheme
that accounts for the change in surface slopes between the coarse-resolution climate model grid and the higher resolution ice sheet
model grid. Each of the above features has significant impact
on modelled ice thickness (shown directly or via changes in temperature and/or precipitation).</p>
      <p id="d1e3838">We have presented a set of ensemble parameters to generate an ensemble
of runs that “bracket reality” and have shown that each ensemble parameter has a significant
impact on modelled PD regional temperatures and/or precipitation.
The new coupled model was subject to a Latin hypercube parameter sweep of 2000 ensemble
simulations for PD boundary and initial conditions. We extracted a sub-ensemble of 500 model runs
according to modelled PD NH ice volume changes. The
mean of the sub-ensemble is warm- and wet-biased for the NH
ice sheet region. However, the model ensemble still
brackets reanalysis precipitation and temperature<?pagebreak page3899?> fields within
two (ensemble) standard deviations for all regions and
within one standard deviation for half of the regions for the case of
temperature.</p>
      <p id="d1e3841">The ensemble's performance at capturing the seasonal cycle is much better. The
ensemble mean difference between summer and winter for all four regions is well
within one standard deviation of reanalysis values for both
temperature and precipitation (and within one degree Celsius for three of
the four regions). This provides some confidence that the model
responds adequately to orbital forcing (at least for components that
operate on sub-annual timescales).</p>
      <p id="d1e3844">The “reality bracketing” criterion is not met for certain features
of atmospheric circulation (especially the wintertime Rossby wave number)
and AMOC strength and variance. Another key limitation of LOVECLIM is
the inability to change bathymetry and land mask (aside from the parameterized
Bering Strait throughflow). The paleoclimate and ice sheet
modelling communities would be well served by a modern successor to
LOVECLIM for large ensemble glacial cycle timescale contexts that permitted
transient changes to bathymetry and land mask.</p>
      <p id="d1e3848">The coupled model runs at about 1 kyr day<inline-formula><mml:math id="M136" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> on one core; therefore, it
enables large ensembles of full glacial cycle integrations. As a step
towards this, our subset of 500 ensemble members is being used for
inception and deglaciation ensemble experiments with the coupled
model.</p>
</sec>

      
      </body>
    <back><notes notes-type="codedataavailability">

      <p id="d1e3867">LOVECLIM is freely available from
<uri>http://www.climate.be/modx/index.php?id=81</uri> (Goosse et al., 2010). The GSM will be
made publicly available in 1–2 years (as detailed code
documentation and further upgrades progress) as a community
model. The LCice 1.0 coupling routines/scripts, the modified version
of LOVECLIM 1.3, and the GSM modules for reading LCice output and computing
advective precipitation corrections are freely available at <uri>http://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1409282</uri>
(Bahadory and Tarasov, 2018).</p>
  </notes><app-group>
        <supplementary-material position="anchor"><p id="d1e3876">The supplement related to this article is available online at: <inline-supplementary-material xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-3883-2018-supplement" xlink:title="pdf">https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-3883-2018-supplement</inline-supplementary-material>.</p></supplementary-material>
        </app-group><notes notes-type="authorcontribution">

      <p id="d1e3885">TB did most of the writing and coding, was responsible for all of the model
runs and undertook all of the data analysis/plotting. LT provided major editorial and project
design contributions, and was responsible for all GSM related codework
including the design and implementation of the advective precipitation scheme.</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="competinginterests">

      <p id="d1e3891">The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.</p>
  </notes><ack><title>Acknowledgements</title><p id="d1e3897">The authors thank Heather Andres for editorial help. This paper benefitted
from reviews by Irina Rogozhina and an anonymous reviewer.</p><p id="d1e3899">This work was supported by a NSERC Discovery Grant (LT), the Canadian
Foundation for Innovation (LT), the Atlantic Computational Excellence
Network (ACEnet), CREATE, InnovateNL(LT), and the Canada Research Chairs program (LT).<?xmltex \hack{\newline}?><?xmltex \hack{\newline}?>
Edited by: Dan Goldberg<?xmltex \hack{\newline}?>
Reviewed by: Irina Rogozhina and one anonymous referee</p></ack><ref-list>
    <title>References</title>

      <ref id="bib1.bibx1"><label>Arnold et al.(2006)Arnold, Rees, Hodson, and
Kohler</label><mixed-citation>Arnold, N. S., Rees, W. G., Hodson, A. J., and Kohler, J.: Topographic controls
on the surface energy balance of a high Arctic valley glacier, J.
Geophys. Res.-Earth Surf., 111, F02011, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2005JF000426" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2005JF000426</ext-link>, 2006.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib1"><label>1</label><mixed-citation>Bahadory, T. and Tarasov, L.: LCice 1.0: A generalized Ice Sheet
Systems Model coupler for LOVECLIM version 1.3, Zenodo,
available at: <uri>http://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1409282</uri>, last access: 21 September 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx2"><label>Balmaseda et al.(2008)Balmaseda, Vidard, and
Anderson</label><mixed-citation>Balmaseda, M. A., Vidard, A., and Anderson, D. L. T.: The ECMWF Ocean Analysis
System: ORA-S3, Mon. Weather Rev., 136, 3018–3034,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/2008MWR2433.1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/2008MWR2433.1</ext-link>, 2008.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx3"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{{Bassford et~al.(2006{\natexlab{a}})Bassford, Siegert, and
Dowdeswell}}?><label>Bassford et al.(2006a)Bassford, Siegert, and
Dowdeswell</label><mixed-citation>
Bassford, R., Siegert, M., and Dowdeswell, J.: Quantifying the mass balance of
ice caps on Severnaya Zemlya, Russian High Arctic. II: Modeling the flow of
the Vavilov Ice Cap under the present climate, Arct. Antarct. Alpine
Res., 38, 13–20, 2006a.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx4"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{{Bassford et~al.(2006{\natexlab{b}})Bassford, Siegert, Dowdeswell,
Oerlemans, Glazovsky, and
Macheret}}?><label>Bassford et al.(2006b)Bassford, Siegert, Dowdeswell,
Oerlemans, Glazovsky, and
Macheret</label><mixed-citation>
Bassford, R., Siegert, M., Dowdeswell, J., Oerlemans, J., Glazovsky, A., and
Macheret, Y.: Quantifying the mass balance of ice caps on Severnaya Zemlya,
Russian High Arctic. I: Climate and mass balance of the Vavilov Ice Cap,
Arct. Antarct. Alpine Res., 38, 1–12, 2006b.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx5"><label>Berger(2014)</label><mixed-citation>
Berger, A.: Milankovitch and astronomical theories of paleoclimates, in:
Milankovitch Anniversary UNESCO Symposium-Water Management in Transition
Countries as Impacted by Climate Change and Other Global Changes, Lessons
from Paleoclimate, and Regional Issues, Jaroslav Černi Institute for
the Development of Water Resources, Belgrade (Serbia), 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx6"><label>Berger(1978)</label><mixed-citation>
Berger, A. L.: Long-Term Variations of Caloric Insolation Resulting from the
Earth's Orbital Elements 1, Quaternary Res., 9, 139–167, 1978.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx7"><label>Birch et al.(2016)Birch, Tziperman, and
Cronin</label><mixed-citation>
Birch, L., Tziperman, E., and Cronin, T.: Glacial Inception in
north-east Canada: The Role of Topography and Clouds, in: EGU General
Assembly Conference Abstracts, Vol. 18 of EGU General Assembly
Conference Abstracts,   EPSC2016–948, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx8"><label>Birch et al.(2017)Birch, Cronin, and
Tziperman</label><mixed-citation>Birch, L., Cronin, T., and Tziperman, E.: Glacial Inception on Baffin Island:
The Role of Insolation, Meteorology, and Topography, J. Climate, 30,
4047–4064, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-16-0576.1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/JCLI-D-16-0576.1</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx9"><label>Brovkin et al.(1997)Brovkin, Ganopolski, and
Svirezhev</label><mixed-citation>Brovkin, V., Ganopolski, A., and Svirezhev, Y.: A continuous climate-vegetation
classification for use in climate-biosphere studies, Ecol. Modell.,
101, 251–261, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/S0304-3800(97)00049-5" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/S0304-3800(97)00049-5</ext-link>,  1997.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx10"><label>Brovkin et al.(2002)</label><mixed-citation>Brovkin, V., Bendtsen, J., Claussen, M., Ganopolski, A., Kubatzki, C.,
Petoukhov, V., and Andreev, A.: Carbon cycle, vegetation, and climate
dynamics in the Holocene: Experiments with the CLIMBER-2 model, Global
Biogeochem. Cy., 16, 861–8620, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2001GB001662" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2001GB001662</ext-link>, 2002.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx11"><label>Campin and Goosse(1999)</label><mixed-citation>
Campin, J.-M. and Goosse, H.: Parameterization of density-driven downsloping
flow for a coarse-resolution ocean model in z-coordinate, Tellus A, 51, 412–430, 1999.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx12"><label>De Boer and Nof(2004)</label><mixed-citation>
De Boer, A. M. and Nof, D.: The exhaust valve of the North Atlantic, J.
Climate, 17, 417–422, 2004.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx13"><label>DeConto and Pollard(2016)</label><mixed-citation>
DeConto, R. M. and Pollard, D.: Contribution of Antarctica to past and future
sea-level rise, Nature, 531, 591–597, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx14"><label>De Woul et al.(2006)</label><mixed-citation>
De Woul, M., Hock, R., Braun, M., Thorsteinsson, T., Jóhannesson, T., and
Halldórsdóttir, S.: Firn layer impact on glacial runoff: a case study
at Hofsjökull, Iceland, Hydrol. Process., 20, 2171–2185, 2006.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx15"><label>Elison Timm et al.(2015)</label><mixed-citation>Elison Timm, O., Friedrich, T., Timmermann, A., and Ganopolski, A.:
Separating the Effects of Northern Hemisphere Ice-Sheets, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M137" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
Concentrations and Orbital Parameters on Global Precipitation During the Late
Pleistocene Glacial Cycles, AGU Fall Meeting Abstracts, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx16"><label>Erokhina et al.(2017)Erokhina, Rogozhina, Prange, Bakker, Bernales,
Paul, and Schulz</label><mixed-citation>
Erokhina, O., Rogozhina, I., Prange, M., Bakker, P., Bernales, J., Paul, A.,
and Schulz, M.: Dependence of slope lapse rate over the Greenland ice sheet
on background climate, J. Glaciol., 63, 568–572, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx17"><label>Etheridge et al.(1998)Etheridge, Barnola, and
Morgan</label><mixed-citation>Etheridge, D., Barnola, J., and Morgan, V.: Historical <inline-formula><mml:math id="M138" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> records from the Law
Dome DE08, DE08-2, and DSS ice cores, Tech. rep., ESS-DIVE (Environmental
System Science Data Infrastructure for a Virtual Ecosystem); Oak Ridge
National Lab.(ORNL), Oak Ridge, TN (United States), 1998.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx18"><label>Fichefet and   Maqueda(1997)</label><mixed-citation>Fichefet, T. and Maqueda, M. A. M.: Sensitivity of a global sea ice model to
the treatment of ice thermodynamics and dynamics, J. Geophys.
Res.-Oceans, 102, 12609–12646, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/97JC00480" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/97JC00480</ext-link>, 1997.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx19"><label>Flowers and   Clarke(2002)</label><mixed-citation>Flowers, G. E. and Clarke, G. K.: A multicomponent coupled model of glacier
hydrology 1. Theory and synthetic examples, J. Geophys. Res.-Solid Earth, 107,
ECV9-1–ECV9-17, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2001JB001122" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2001JB001122</ext-link>, 2002.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx20"><label>Galle et al.(1992)</label><mixed-citation>Galle, H., Van Yperselb, J. P., Fichefet, T., Marsiat, I., Tricot, C., and
Berger, A.: Simulation of the last glacial cycle by a coupled, sectorially
averaged climate-ice sheet model: 2. Response to insolation and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M139" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
variations, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 97,
15713–15740, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/92JD01256" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/92JD01256</ext-link>, 1992.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx21"><label>Ganopolski et al.(2010)Ganopolski, Calov, and
Claussen</label><mixed-citation>Ganopolski, A., Calov, R., and Claussen, M.: Simulation of the last glacial
cycle with a coupled climate ice-sheet model of intermediate complexity,
Clim. Past, 6, 229–244, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/cp-6-229-2010" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/cp-6-229-2010</ext-link>, 2010.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx22"><label>Ganopolski et al.(2016)Ganopolski, Winkelmann, and
Schellnhuber</label><mixed-citation>Ganopolski, A., Winkelmann, R., and Schellnhuber, H. J.: Critical
insolation–<inline-formula><mml:math id="M140" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> relation for diagnosing past and future glacial inception,
Nature, 529, 200–203, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx23"><label>Gardner et al.(2009)Gardner, Sharp, Koerner, Labine, Boon, Marshall,
Burgess, and Lewis</label><mixed-citation>Gardner, A. S., Sharp, M. J., Koerner, R. M., Labine, C., Boon, S., Marshall,
S. J., Burgess, D. O., and Lewis, D.: Near-Surface Temperature Lapse Rates
over Arctic Glaciers and Their Implications for Temperature Downscaling,
J. Climate, 22, 4281–4298, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/2009JCLI2845.1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/2009JCLI2845.1</ext-link>, 2009.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx24"><label>Glover(1999)</label><mixed-citation>
Glover, R. W.: Influence of spatial resolution and treatment of orography on
GCM estimates of the surface mass balance of the Greenland Ice Sheet, J.
Climate, 12, 551–563, 1999.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx25"><label>Goosse et al.(1997)Goosse, Campin, Fichefet, and
Deleersnijder</label><mixed-citation>
Goosse, H., Campin, J., Fichefet, T., and Deleersnijder, E.: Sensitivity of a
global ice–ocean model to the Bering Strait throughflow, Clim. Dynam.,
13, 349–358, 1997.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx26"><label>Goosse et al.(2001)Goosse, Campin, Deleersnijder, Fichefet, Mathieu,
Maqueda, and Tartinville</label><mixed-citation>
Goosse, H., Campin, J.-M., Deleersnijder, E., Fichefet, T., Mathieu, P.-P.,
Maqueda, M. M., and Tartinville, B.: Description of the CLIO model version
3.0, Institut d'Astronomie et de Géophysique Georges Lemaitre, Catholic
University of Louvain, Belgium, 2001.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx27"><label>Goosse et al.(2005)Goosse, Renssen, Timmermann, and
Bradley</label><mixed-citation>
Goosse, H., Renssen, H., Timmermann, A., and Bradley, R. S.: Internal and
forced climate variability during the last millennium: a model-data
comparison using ensemble simulations, Quaternary Sci. Rev., 24,
1345–1360, 2005.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx28"><label>Goosse et al.(2007)Goosse, Driesschaert, Fichefet, and
Loutre</label><mixed-citation>Goosse, H., Driesschaert, E., Fichefet, T., and Loutre, M.-F.: Information on
the early Holocene climate constrains the summer sea ice projections for the
21st century, Clim. Past, 3, 683–692, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/cp-3-683-2007" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/cp-3-683-2007</ext-link>,
2007.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <?pagebreak page3901?><ref id="bib1.bibx29"><label>Goosse et al.(2010)</label><mixed-citation>Goosse, H., Brovkin, V., Fichefet, T., Haarsma, R., Huybrechts, P., Jongma,
J., Mouchet, A., Selten, F., Barriat, P.-Y., Campin, J.-M., Deleersnijder,
E., Driesschaert, E., Goelzer, H., Janssens, I., Loutre, M.-F., Morales
Maqueda, M. A., Opsteegh, T., Mathieu, P.-P., Munhoven, G., Pettersson, E.
J., Renssen, H., Roche, D. M., Schaeffer, M., Tartinville, B., Timmermann,
A., and Weber, S. L.: Description of the Earth system model of intermediate
complexity LOVECLIM version 1.2, Geosci. Model Dev., 3, 603–633,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-3-603-2010" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/gmd-3-603-2010</ext-link>, 2010.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx30"><label>Haarsma et al.(1996)</label><mixed-citation>
Haarsma, R., Selten, F., Opsteegh, J., Lenderink, G., and Liu, Q.: ECBILT, a
coupled atmosphere ocean sea-ice model for climate predictability studies,
KNMI, De Bilt, The Netherlands, 31, 1996.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx31"><label>Hahn et al.(2015)</label><mixed-citation>
Hahn, J., Walsh, J., Widiasih, E., and McGehee, R.: Periodicity in a
Conceptual Model of Glacial Cycles in the Absence of Milankovitch Forcing,
AGU Fall Meeting Abstracts, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx32"><label>Heinemann et al.(2014)</label><mixed-citation>Heinemann, M., Timmermann, A., Elison Timm, O., Saito, F., and Abe-Ouchi, A.:
Deglacial ice sheet meltdown: orbital pacemaking and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M141" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> effects, Clim. Past,
10, 1567–1579, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/cp-10-1567-2014" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/cp-10-1567-2014</ext-link>, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx33"><label>Hewitt and   Mitchell(1997)</label><mixed-citation>
Hewitt, C. D. and Mitchell, J. F. B.: Radiative forcing and response of a GCM
to ice age boundary conditions: cloud feedback and climate sensitivity,
Clim. Dynam., 13, 821–834, 1997.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx34"><label>Hibler(1979)</label><mixed-citation>Hibler, W. D.: A Dynamic Thermodynamic Sea Ice Model, J. Phys.
Oceanogr., 9, 815–846,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0485(1979)009&lt;0815:ADTSIM&gt;2.0.CO;2" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/1520-0485(1979)009&lt;0815:ADTSIM&gt;2.0.CO;2</ext-link>, 1979.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx35"><label>Hu et al.(2008)</label><mixed-citation>Hu, A., Otto-Bliesner, B. L., Meehl, G. A., Han, W., Morrill, C., Brady, E. C.,
and Briegleb, B.: Response of Thermohaline Circulation to Freshwater Forcing
under Present-Day and LGM Conditions, J. Climate, 21, 2239–2258,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/2007JCLI1985.1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/2007JCLI1985.1</ext-link>, 2008.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx36"><label>Jacobs et al.(1992)</label><mixed-citation>
Jacobs, S., Hellmer, H., Doake, C., Jenkins, A., and Frolich, R.: Melting of
ice shelves and the mass balance of Antarctica, J. Glaciol., 38, 375–387,
1992.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx37"><label>Johns et al.(1997)Johns, Carnell, Crossley, Gregory, Mitchell,
Senior, Tett, and Wood</label><mixed-citation>
Johns, T. C., Carnell, R. E., Crossley, J. F., Gregory, J. M., Mitchell, J.
F. B., Senior, C. A., Tett, S. F. B., and Wood, R. A.: The second Hadley
Centre coupled ocean-atmosphere GCM: model description, spinup and
validation, Clim. Dynam., 13, 103–134, 1997.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx38"><label>Kageyama et al.(2013)</label><mixed-citation>Kageyama, M., Merkel, U., Otto-Bliesner, B., Prange, M., Abe-Ouchi, A.,
Lohmann, G., Ohgaito, R., Roche, D. M., Singarayer, J., Swingedouw, D., and X
Zhang: Climatic impacts of fresh water hosing under Last Glacial Maximum
conditions: a multi-model study, Clim. Past, 9, 935–953,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/cp-9-935-2013" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/cp-9-935-2013</ext-link>, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx39"><label>Krebs and   Timmermann(2007)</label><mixed-citation>
Krebs, U. and Timmermann, A.: Tropical air–sea interactions accelerate the
recovery of the Atlantic meridional overturning circulation after a major
shutdown, J. Climate, 20, 4940–4956, 2007.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx40"><label>Liu et al.(2009)</label><mixed-citation>Liu, Z., Otto-Bliesner, B. L., He, F., Brady, E. C., Tomas, R., Clark, P. U.,
Carlson, A. E., Lynch-Stieglitz, J., Curry, W., Brook, E., Erickson, D.,
Jacob, R., Kutzbach, J., and Cheng, J.: Transient Simulation of Last
Deglaciation with a New Mechanism for Bølling-Allerød Warming, Science,
325, 310–314, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1171041" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1126/science.1171041</ext-link>, 2009.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx41"><label>Mairesse et al.(2013)</label><mixed-citation>Mairesse, A., Goosse, H., Mathiot, P., Wanner, H., and Dubinkina, S.:
Investigating the consistency between proxy-based reconstructions and climate
models using data assimilation: a mid-Holocene case study, Clim. Past, 9,
2741–2757, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/cp-9-2741-2013" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/cp-9-2741-2013</ext-link>, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx42"><label>Manabe et al.(1991)</label><mixed-citation>Manabe, S., Stouffer, R., Spelman, M., and Bryan, K.: Transient responses of a
coupled ocean–atmosphere model to gradual changes of atmospheric <inline-formula><mml:math id="M142" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. Part
I. Annual mean response, J. Climate, 4, 785–818, 1991.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx43"><label>Marshall et al.(2007)</label><mixed-citation>Marshall, S. J., Sharp, M. J., Burgess, D. O., and Anslow, F. S.:
Near-surface-temperature lapse rates on the Prince of Wales Icefield,
Ellesmere Island, Canada: implications for regional downscaling of
temperature, Int. J. Climatol., 27, 385–398,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/joc.1396" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/joc.1396</ext-link>, 2007.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx44"><label>McManus et al.(2004)</label><mixed-citation>
McManus, J. F., Francois, R., Gherardi, J.-M., Keigwin, L. D., and Brown-Leger,
S.: Collapse and rapid resumption of Atlantic meridional circulation linked
to deglacial climate changes, Nature, 428, 834–837, 2004.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx45"><label>Monnin et al.(2001)</label><mixed-citation>
Monnin, E., Indermühle, A., Dällenbach, A., Flückiger, J.,
Stauffer, B., Stocker, T. F., Raynaud, D., and Barnola, J.-M.: Atmospheric
CO2 concentrations over the last glacial termination, Science, 291, 112–114,
2001.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx46"><label>Morzadec and Tarasov(2015)</label><mixed-citation>Le Morzadec, K., Tarasov, L., Morlighem, M., and Seroussi, H.: A new sub-grid
surface mass balance and flux model for continental-scale ice sheet
modelling: testing and last glacial cycle, Geosci. Model Dev., 8, 3199–3213,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-8-3199-2015" ext-link-type="DOI">https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-8-3199-2015</ext-link>, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx47"><label>Nikolova et al.(2013)</label><mixed-citation>Nikolova, I., Yin, Q., Berger, A., Singh, U. K., and Karami, M. P.: The last
interglacial (Eemian) climate simulated by LOVECLIM and CCSM3, Clim. Past, 9,
1789–1806, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/cp-9-1789-2013" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/cp-9-1789-2013</ext-link>, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx48"><label>Opsteegh et al.(1998)Opsteegh, Haarsma, Selten, and
Kattenberg</label><mixed-citation>Opsteegh, J. D., Haarsma, R. J., Selten, F. M., and Kattenberg, A.: ECBILT: a
dynamic alternative to mixed boundary conditions in ocean models, Tellus A,
50, 348–367, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0870.1998.t01-1-00007.x" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1034/j.1600-0870.1998.t01-1-00007.x</ext-link>, 1998.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx49"><label>Otto-Bliesner and   Brady(2010)</label><mixed-citation>Otto-Bliesner, B. L. and Brady, E. C.: The sensitivity of the climate response
to the magnitude and location of freshwater forcing: last glacial maximum
experiments, Quaternary Sci. Rev., 29, 56–73,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.quascirev.2009.07.004" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.quascirev.2009.07.004</ext-link>, 2010.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx50"><label>Rahmstorf(1995)</label><mixed-citation>
Rahmstorf, S.: Bifurcations of the Atlantic thermohaline circulation in
response to changes in the hydrological cycle, Nature, 378, 145–149, 1995.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx51"><label>Rahmstorf et al.(2005)Rahmstorf, Crucifix, Ganopolski, Goosse,
Kamenkovich, Knutti, Lohmann, Marsh, Mysak, Wang
et al.</label><mixed-citation>Rahmstorf, S., Crucifix, M., Ganopolski, A., Goosse, H., Kamenkovich, I., Knutti, R., Lohmann,
G., Marsh, R., Mysak, L. A. and  Wang, Z., and Weaver, A.J.:
Thermohaline circulation hysteresis: A model intercomparison, Geophys.
Res. Lett., 32, 23, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2005GL023655" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2005GL023655</ext-link>, 2005.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx52"><label>Raper and   Braithwaite(2006)</label><mixed-citation>
Raper, S. C. and Braithwaite, R. J.: Low sea level rise projections from
mountain glaciers and icecaps under global warming, Nature, 439, 311–313, 2006.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx53"><label>Renssen et al.(2009)</label><mixed-citation>
Renssen, H., Seppä, H., Heiri, O., Roche, D., Goosse, H., and Fichefet, T.:
The spatial and temporal complexity of the Holocene thermal maximum, Nat.
Geosci., 2, 411–414, 2009.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx54"><label>Ridley et al.(2005)Ridley, Huybrechts, Gregory, and
Lowe</label><mixed-citation>Ridley, J. K., Huybrechts, P., Gregory, J. M., and Lowe, J. A.: Elimination of
the Greenland Ice Sheet in a High <inline-formula><mml:math id="M143" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> Climate, J. Climate, 18,
3409–3427, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI3482.1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/JCLI3482.1</ext-link>, 2005.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx55"><label>Rind et al.(1989)Rind, Peteet, and
Kukla</label><mixed-citation>Rind, D., Peteet, D., and Kukla, G.: Can Milankovitch orbital variations
initiate the growth of ice sheets in a general circulation model?, J.
Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 94, 12851–12871,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/JD094iD10p12851" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/JD094iD10p12851</ext-link>, 1989.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx56"><label>Roberts et al.(2014)Roberts, Valdes, and
Payne</label><mixed-citation>Roberts, W. H. G., Valdes, P. J., and Payne, A. J.:
Topography's crucial role in Heinrich Events, P.
Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 47, 16688–16693, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1414882111" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1073/pnas.1414882111</ext-link>, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <?pagebreak page3902?><ref id="bib1.bibx57"><label>Roche et al.(2007)Roche, Dokken, Goosse, Renssen, and
Weber</label><mixed-citation>Roche, D. M., Dokken, T. M., Goosse, H., Renssen, H., and Weber, S. L.:
Climate of the Last Glacial Maximum: sensitivity studies and model-data
comparison with the LOVECLIM coupled model, Clim. Past, 3, 205–224,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/cp-3-205-2007" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/cp-3-205-2007</ext-link>, 2007.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx58"><label>Roche et al.(2012)Roche, Crosta, and
Renssen</label><mixed-citation>
Roche, D. M., Crosta, X., and Renssen, H.: Evaluating Southern Ocean sea-ice for
the Last Glacial Maximum and pre-industrial climates: PMIP-2 models and data
evidence, Quaternary Sci. Rev., 56, 99–106, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx59"><label>Roche et al.(2014)</label><mixed-citation>Roche, D. M., Dumas, C., Bügelmayer, M., Charbit, S., and Ritz, C.: Adding a
dynamical cryosphere to iLOVECLIM (version 1.0): coupling with the GRISLI
ice-sheet model, Geosci. Model Dev., 7, 1377–1394,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-7-1377-2014" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/gmd-7-1377-2014</ext-link>, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx60"><label>Rossow(1996)</label><mixed-citation>
Rossow, W. B.: International Satellite Cloud Climatology Project (ISCCP): New
radiance calibrations, World Meteorological Organization, 1996.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx61"><label>Shaffer and   Bendtsen(1994)</label><mixed-citation>
Shaffer, G. and Bendtsen, J.: Role of the Bering Strait in controlling North
Atlantic ocean circulation and climate, Nature, 367, 354–357, 1994.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx62"><label>Stokes et al.(2012)</label><mixed-citation>
Stokes, C. R., Tarasov, L., and Dyke, A. S.: Dynamics of the North American Ice
Sheet Complex during its inception and build-up to the Last Glacial Maximum,
Quaternary Sci. Rev., 50, 86–104, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx63"><label>Stouffer et al.(2006)</label><mixed-citation>Stouffer, R. J., Yin, J., Gregory, J. M., Dixon, K. W., Spelman, M. J., Hurlin,
W., Weaver, A. J., Eby, M., Flato, G. M., Hasumi, H., Hu, A., Jungclaus,
J. H., Kamenkovich, I. V., Levermann, A., Montoya, M., Murakami, S., Nawrath,
S., Oka, A., Peltier, W. R., Robitaille, D. Y., Sokolov, A., Vettoretti, G.,
and Weber, S. L.: Investigating the Causes of the Response of the
Thermohaline Circulation to Past and Future Climate Changes, J.
Climate, 19, 1365–1387, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI3689.1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/JCLI3689.1</ext-link>,  2006.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx64"><label>Tarasov and Peltier(1997)</label><mixed-citation>
Tarasov, L. and Peltier, W. R.: A high-resolution model of the 100 kyr Ice Age
cycle, Ann. Glaciol., 25, 58–65, 1997.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx65"><label>Tarasov and Peltier(2002)</label><mixed-citation>
Tarasov, L. and Peltier, W. R.: Greenland glacial history and local
geodynamic consequences, Geophys. J. Int., 150, 198–229, 2002.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx66"><label>Tarasov and Peltier(2006)</label><mixed-citation>
Tarasov, L. and Peltier, W. R.: A calibrated deglacial drainage chronology for
the North American continent: Evidence of an Arctic trigger for the
Younger Dryas, Quaternary Sci. Rev., 25, 659–688, 2006.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx67"><label>Tarasov and Peltier(2007)</label><mixed-citation>Tarasov, L. and Peltier, W. R.: The Co-evolution of continental ice cover and
permafrost extent over the last glacial-interglacial cycle in North
America, J. Geophys. Res.-Earth Surf., 112, F02S08, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2006JF000661" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2006JF000661</ext-link>, 2007.
</mixed-citation></ref><?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx68"><label>Tarasov et al.(2012)Tarasov, Dyke, Neal, and Peltier</label><mixed-citation>
Tarasov, L., Dyke, A. S., Neal, R. M., and Peltier, W. R.: A data-calibrated
distribution of deglacial chronologies for the North American ice complex
from glaciological modeling, Earth Planet. Sci.  Lett., 315–316, 30–40, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx69"><label>Thomas et al.(2003)</label><mixed-citation>Thomas, R. H., Abdalati, W., Frederick, E., Krabill, W. B., Manizade, S., and
Steffen, K.: Investigation of surface melting and dynamic thinning on
Jakobshavn Isbræ, Greenland, J. Glaciol., 49, 231–239,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.3189/172756503781830764" ext-link-type="DOI">10.3189/172756503781830764</ext-link>, 2003.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx70"><label>Timmermann et al.(2003)</label><mixed-citation>Timmermann, A., Gildor, H., Schulz, M., and Tziperman, E.: Coherent Resonant
Millennial-Scale Climate Oscillations Triggered by Massive Meltwater Pulses,
J. Climate, 16, 2569–2585,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0442(2003)016&lt;2569:CRMCOT&gt;2.0.CO;2" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/1520-0442(2003)016&lt;2569:CRMCOT&gt;2.0.CO;2</ext-link>, 2003.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx71"><label>van den Broeke et al.(2008)</label><mixed-citation>van den Broeke, M., Smeets, P., Ettema, J., and Munneke, P. K.: Surface
radiation balance in the ablation zone of the west Greenland ice sheet,
J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 113, D13105, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2007JD009283" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2007JD009283</ext-link>, 2008.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx72"><label>van Meerbeeck et al.(2009)</label><mixed-citation>Van Meerbeeck, C. J., Renssen, H., and Roche, D. M.: How did Marine Isotope
Stage 3 and Last Glacial Maximum climates differ? – Perspectives from
equilibrium simulations, Clim. Past, 5, 33–51,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/cp-5-33-2009" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/cp-5-33-2009</ext-link>, 2009.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx73"><label>Walsh et al.(2015)Walsh, Chapman, and
Fetterer</label><mixed-citation>Walsh, J., Chapman, W., and Fetterer, F.: Gridded Monthly Sea Ice Extent and
Concentration, 1850 Onward, Version 1, Tech. rep., NSIDC: National Snow and
Ice Data Center, Boulder, Colorado USA, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.7265/N5833PZ5" ext-link-type="DOI">10.7265/N5833PZ5</ext-link>, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx74"><label>Widmann et al.(2010)Widmann, Goosse, van der Schrier, Schnur, and
Barkmeijer</label><mixed-citation>Widmann, M., Goosse, H., van der Schrier, G., Schnur, R., and Barkmeijer, J.:
Using data assimilation to study extratropical Northern Hemisphere climate
over the last millennium, Clim. Past, 6, 627–644,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/cp-6-627-2010" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/cp-6-627-2010</ext-link>, 2010.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx75"><label>Xu et al.(2013)Xu, Rignot, Fenty, Menemenlis, and
Flexas</label><mixed-citation>Xu, Y., Rignot, E., Fenty, I., Menemenlis, D., and Flexas, M. M.: Subaqueous
melting of Store Glacier, west Greenland from three-dimensional,
high-resolution numerical modeling and ocean observations, Geophys.
Res. Lett., 40, 4648–4653, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/grl.50825" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/grl.50825</ext-link>,  2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx76"><label>Xun et al.(2013)Xun, Gregor, Gerrit, and
Xu</label><mixed-citation>Xun, G., Gregor, K., Gerrit, L., and Xu, Z.: Dependence of abrupt Atlantic
meridional ocean circulation changes on climate background states,
Geophys. Res. Lett., 40, 3698–3704, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/grl.50701" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/grl.50701</ext-link>,  2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx77"><label>Yin et al.(2014)</label><mixed-citation>Yin, Q., Berger, A., Ganopolski, A., Goelzer, H., Guo, Z., and
Huybrechts, P.: Ice sheets, insolation and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M144" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> during the interglacial
MIS-13, in: EGU General Assembly Conference Abstracts, Vol. 16, EGU
General Assembly Conference Abstracts, p. 2910, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>

  </ref-list></back>
    <!--<article-title-html>LCice 1.0 – a generalized Ice Sheet System Model coupler for LOVECLIM version 1.3: description, sensitivities, and validation with the Glacial Systems Model (GSM version D2017.aug17)</article-title-html>
<abstract-html><p>We have coupled an Earth system model of intermediate complexity
(LOVECLIM) to the Glacial Systems Model (GSM) using the LCice 1.0 coupler. The coupling scheme
is flexible enough to enable asynchronous coupling between any
glacial cycle ice sheet model and (with some code work) any Earth system model of
intermediate complexity (EMIC).
This coupling includes a number of interactions between
ice sheets and climate that are often neglected: dynamic meltwater runoff routing, novel downscaling
for precipitation that corrects orographic forcing to the higher resolution ice sheet grid (<q>advective precipitation</q>),
dynamic vertical temperature gradient, and
ocean temperatures for sub-shelf melt.  The sensitivity of the
coupled model with respect to the selected parameterizations and
coupling schemes is investigated. Each new coupling feature
is shown to have a significant impact on ice sheet evolution.</p><p>An ensemble of runs is used to
explore the behaviour of the coupled model over a set of 2000
parameter vectors using present-day (PD) initial and boundary
conditions.  The ensemble of coupled model runs is compared against
PD reanalysis data for atmosphere (2&thinsp;m temperature,
precipitation, jet stream, and Rossby number of jet), ocean (sea ice
and Atlantic Meridional Overturning
Circulation – AMOC), and Northern Hemisphere
ice sheet thickness and extent.  The parameter vectors are then
narrowed by rejecting model runs (1700&thinsp;CE to present) with regional land ice volume
changes beyond an acceptance range.  The selected subset
forms the basis for ongoing work to explore the spatial–temporal
phase space of the last two glacial cycles.</p></abstract-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib1"><label>Arnold et al.(2006)Arnold, Rees, Hodson, and
Kohler</label><mixed-citation>
Arnold, N. S., Rees, W. G., Hodson, A. J., and Kohler, J.: Topographic controls
on the surface energy balance of a high Arctic valley glacier, J.
Geophys. Res.-Earth Surf., 111, F02011, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2005JF000426" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2005JF000426</a>, 2006.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib2"><label>1</label><mixed-citation>
Bahadory, T. and Tarasov, L.: LCice 1.0: A generalized Ice Sheet
Systems Model coupler for LOVECLIM version 1.3, Zenodo,
available at: <a href="http://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1409282" target="_blank">http://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1409282</a>, last access: 21 September 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib3"><label>Balmaseda et al.(2008)Balmaseda, Vidard, and
Anderson</label><mixed-citation>
Balmaseda, M. A., Vidard, A., and Anderson, D. L. T.: The ECMWF Ocean Analysis
System: ORA-S3, Mon. Weather Rev., 136, 3018–3034,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/2008MWR2433.1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/2008MWR2433.1</a>, 2008.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib4"><label>Bassford et al.(2006a)Bassford, Siegert, and
Dowdeswell</label><mixed-citation>
Bassford, R., Siegert, M., and Dowdeswell, J.: Quantifying the mass balance of
ice caps on Severnaya Zemlya, Russian High Arctic. II: Modeling the flow of
the Vavilov Ice Cap under the present climate, Arct. Antarct. Alpine
Res., 38, 13–20, 2006a.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib5"><label>Bassford et al.(2006b)Bassford, Siegert, Dowdeswell,
Oerlemans, Glazovsky, and
Macheret</label><mixed-citation>
Bassford, R., Siegert, M., Dowdeswell, J., Oerlemans, J., Glazovsky, A., and
Macheret, Y.: Quantifying the mass balance of ice caps on Severnaya Zemlya,
Russian High Arctic. I: Climate and mass balance of the Vavilov Ice Cap,
Arct. Antarct. Alpine Res., 38, 1–12, 2006b.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib6"><label>Berger(2014)</label><mixed-citation>
Berger, A.: Milankovitch and astronomical theories of paleoclimates, in:
Milankovitch Anniversary UNESCO Symposium-Water Management in Transition
Countries as Impacted by Climate Change and Other Global Changes, Lessons
from Paleoclimate, and Regional Issues, Jaroslav Černi Institute for
the Development of Water Resources, Belgrade (Serbia), 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib7"><label>Berger(1978)</label><mixed-citation>
Berger, A. L.: Long-Term Variations of Caloric Insolation Resulting from the
Earth's Orbital Elements 1, Quaternary Res., 9, 139–167, 1978.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib8"><label>Birch et al.(2016)Birch, Tziperman, and
Cronin</label><mixed-citation>
Birch, L., Tziperman, E., and Cronin, T.: Glacial Inception in
north-east Canada: The Role of Topography and Clouds, in: EGU General
Assembly Conference Abstracts, Vol. 18 of EGU General Assembly
Conference Abstracts,   EPSC2016–948, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib9"><label>Birch et al.(2017)Birch, Cronin, and
Tziperman</label><mixed-citation>
Birch, L., Cronin, T., and Tziperman, E.: Glacial Inception on Baffin Island:
The Role of Insolation, Meteorology, and Topography, J. Climate, 30,
4047–4064, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-16-0576.1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-16-0576.1</a>, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib10"><label>Brovkin et al.(1997)Brovkin, Ganopolski, and
Svirezhev</label><mixed-citation>
Brovkin, V., Ganopolski, A., and Svirezhev, Y.: A continuous climate-vegetation
classification for use in climate-biosphere studies, Ecol. Modell.,
101, 251–261, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/S0304-3800(97)00049-5" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/S0304-3800(97)00049-5</a>,  1997.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib11"><label>Brovkin et al.(2002)</label><mixed-citation>
Brovkin, V., Bendtsen, J., Claussen, M., Ganopolski, A., Kubatzki, C.,
Petoukhov, V., and Andreev, A.: Carbon cycle, vegetation, and climate
dynamics in the Holocene: Experiments with the CLIMBER-2 model, Global
Biogeochem. Cy., 16, 861–8620, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2001GB001662" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2001GB001662</a>, 2002.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib12"><label>Campin and Goosse(1999)</label><mixed-citation>
Campin, J.-M. and Goosse, H.: Parameterization of density-driven downsloping
flow for a coarse-resolution ocean model in z-coordinate, Tellus A, 51, 412–430, 1999.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib13"><label>De Boer and Nof(2004)</label><mixed-citation>
De Boer, A. M. and Nof, D.: The exhaust valve of the North Atlantic, J.
Climate, 17, 417–422, 2004.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib14"><label>DeConto and Pollard(2016)</label><mixed-citation>
DeConto, R. M. and Pollard, D.: Contribution of Antarctica to past and future
sea-level rise, Nature, 531, 591–597, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib15"><label>De Woul et al.(2006)</label><mixed-citation>
De Woul, M., Hock, R., Braun, M., Thorsteinsson, T., Jóhannesson, T., and
Halldórsdóttir, S.: Firn layer impact on glacial runoff: a case study
at Hofsjökull, Iceland, Hydrol. Process., 20, 2171–2185, 2006.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib16"><label>Elison Timm et al.(2015)</label><mixed-citation>
Elison Timm, O., Friedrich, T., Timmermann, A., and Ganopolski, A.:
Separating the Effects of Northern Hemisphere Ice-Sheets, CO<sub>2</sub>
Concentrations and Orbital Parameters on Global Precipitation During the Late
Pleistocene Glacial Cycles, AGU Fall Meeting Abstracts, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib17"><label>Erokhina et al.(2017)Erokhina, Rogozhina, Prange, Bakker, Bernales,
Paul, and Schulz</label><mixed-citation>
Erokhina, O., Rogozhina, I., Prange, M., Bakker, P., Bernales, J., Paul, A.,
and Schulz, M.: Dependence of slope lapse rate over the Greenland ice sheet
on background climate, J. Glaciol., 63, 568–572, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib18"><label>Etheridge et al.(1998)Etheridge, Barnola, and
Morgan</label><mixed-citation>
Etheridge, D., Barnola, J., and Morgan, V.: Historical CO<sub>2</sub> records from the Law
Dome DE08, DE08-2, and DSS ice cores, Tech. rep., ESS-DIVE (Environmental
System Science Data Infrastructure for a Virtual Ecosystem); Oak Ridge
National Lab.(ORNL), Oak Ridge, TN (United States), 1998.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib19"><label>Fichefet and   Maqueda(1997)</label><mixed-citation>
Fichefet, T. and Maqueda, M. A. M.: Sensitivity of a global sea ice model to
the treatment of ice thermodynamics and dynamics, J. Geophys.
Res.-Oceans, 102, 12609–12646, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/97JC00480" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/97JC00480</a>, 1997.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib20"><label>Flowers and   Clarke(2002)</label><mixed-citation>
Flowers, G. E. and Clarke, G. K.: A multicomponent coupled model of glacier
hydrology 1. Theory and synthetic examples, J. Geophys. Res.-Solid Earth, 107,
ECV9-1–ECV9-17, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2001JB001122" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2001JB001122</a>, 2002.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib21"><label>Galle et al.(1992)</label><mixed-citation>
Galle, H., Van Yperselb, J. P., Fichefet, T., Marsiat, I., Tricot, C., and
Berger, A.: Simulation of the last glacial cycle by a coupled, sectorially
averaged climate-ice sheet model: 2. Response to insolation and CO<sub>2</sub>
variations, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 97,
15713–15740, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/92JD01256" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/92JD01256</a>, 1992.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib22"><label>Ganopolski et al.(2010)Ganopolski, Calov, and
Claussen</label><mixed-citation>
Ganopolski, A., Calov, R., and Claussen, M.: Simulation of the last glacial
cycle with a coupled climate ice-sheet model of intermediate complexity,
Clim. Past, 6, 229–244, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/cp-6-229-2010" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/cp-6-229-2010</a>, 2010.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib23"><label>Ganopolski et al.(2016)Ganopolski, Winkelmann, and
Schellnhuber</label><mixed-citation>
Ganopolski, A., Winkelmann, R., and Schellnhuber, H. J.: Critical
insolation–CO<sub>2</sub> relation for diagnosing past and future glacial inception,
Nature, 529, 200–203, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib24"><label>Gardner et al.(2009)Gardner, Sharp, Koerner, Labine, Boon, Marshall,
Burgess, and Lewis</label><mixed-citation>
Gardner, A. S., Sharp, M. J., Koerner, R. M., Labine, C., Boon, S., Marshall,
S. J., Burgess, D. O., and Lewis, D.: Near-Surface Temperature Lapse Rates
over Arctic Glaciers and Their Implications for Temperature Downscaling,
J. Climate, 22, 4281–4298, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/2009JCLI2845.1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/2009JCLI2845.1</a>, 2009.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib25"><label>Glover(1999)</label><mixed-citation>
Glover, R. W.: Influence of spatial resolution and treatment of orography on
GCM estimates of the surface mass balance of the Greenland Ice Sheet, J.
Climate, 12, 551–563, 1999.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib26"><label>Goosse et al.(1997)Goosse, Campin, Fichefet, and
Deleersnijder</label><mixed-citation>
Goosse, H., Campin, J., Fichefet, T., and Deleersnijder, E.: Sensitivity of a
global ice–ocean model to the Bering Strait throughflow, Clim. Dynam.,
13, 349–358, 1997.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib27"><label>Goosse et al.(2001)Goosse, Campin, Deleersnijder, Fichefet, Mathieu,
Maqueda, and Tartinville</label><mixed-citation>
Goosse, H., Campin, J.-M., Deleersnijder, E., Fichefet, T., Mathieu, P.-P.,
Maqueda, M. M., and Tartinville, B.: Description of the CLIO model version
3.0, Institut d'Astronomie et de Géophysique Georges Lemaitre, Catholic
University of Louvain, Belgium, 2001.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib28"><label>Goosse et al.(2005)Goosse, Renssen, Timmermann, and
Bradley</label><mixed-citation>
Goosse, H., Renssen, H., Timmermann, A., and Bradley, R. S.: Internal and
forced climate variability during the last millennium: a model-data
comparison using ensemble simulations, Quaternary Sci. Rev., 24,
1345–1360, 2005.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib29"><label>Goosse et al.(2007)Goosse, Driesschaert, Fichefet, and
Loutre</label><mixed-citation>
Goosse, H., Driesschaert, E., Fichefet, T., and Loutre, M.-F.: Information on
the early Holocene climate constrains the summer sea ice projections for the
21st century, Clim. Past, 3, 683–692, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/cp-3-683-2007" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/cp-3-683-2007</a>,
2007.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib30"><label>Goosse et al.(2010)</label><mixed-citation>
Goosse, H., Brovkin, V., Fichefet, T., Haarsma, R., Huybrechts, P., Jongma,
J., Mouchet, A., Selten, F., Barriat, P.-Y., Campin, J.-M., Deleersnijder,
E., Driesschaert, E., Goelzer, H., Janssens, I., Loutre, M.-F., Morales
Maqueda, M. A., Opsteegh, T., Mathieu, P.-P., Munhoven, G., Pettersson, E.
J., Renssen, H., Roche, D. M., Schaeffer, M., Tartinville, B., Timmermann,
A., and Weber, S. L.: Description of the Earth system model of intermediate
complexity LOVECLIM version 1.2, Geosci. Model Dev., 3, 603–633,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-3-603-2010" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-3-603-2010</a>, 2010.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib31"><label>Haarsma et al.(1996)</label><mixed-citation>
Haarsma, R., Selten, F., Opsteegh, J., Lenderink, G., and Liu, Q.: ECBILT, a
coupled atmosphere ocean sea-ice model for climate predictability studies,
KNMI, De Bilt, The Netherlands, 31, 1996.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib32"><label>Hahn et al.(2015)</label><mixed-citation>
Hahn, J., Walsh, J., Widiasih, E., and McGehee, R.: Periodicity in a
Conceptual Model of Glacial Cycles in the Absence of Milankovitch Forcing,
AGU Fall Meeting Abstracts, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib33"><label>Heinemann et al.(2014)</label><mixed-citation>
Heinemann, M., Timmermann, A., Elison Timm, O., Saito, F., and Abe-Ouchi, A.:
Deglacial ice sheet meltdown: orbital pacemaking and CO<sub>2</sub> effects, Clim. Past,
10, 1567–1579, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/cp-10-1567-2014" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/cp-10-1567-2014</a>, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib34"><label>Hewitt and   Mitchell(1997)</label><mixed-citation>
Hewitt, C. D. and Mitchell, J. F. B.: Radiative forcing and response of a GCM
to ice age boundary conditions: cloud feedback and climate sensitivity,
Clim. Dynam., 13, 821–834, 1997.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib35"><label>Hibler(1979)</label><mixed-citation>
Hibler, W. D.: A Dynamic Thermodynamic Sea Ice Model, J. Phys.
Oceanogr., 9, 815–846,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0485(1979)009&lt;0815:ADTSIM&gt;2.0.CO;2" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0485(1979)009&lt;0815:ADTSIM&gt;2.0.CO;2</a>, 1979.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib36"><label>Hu et al.(2008)</label><mixed-citation>
Hu, A., Otto-Bliesner, B. L., Meehl, G. A., Han, W., Morrill, C., Brady, E. C.,
and Briegleb, B.: Response of Thermohaline Circulation to Freshwater Forcing
under Present-Day and LGM Conditions, J. Climate, 21, 2239–2258,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/2007JCLI1985.1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/2007JCLI1985.1</a>, 2008.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib37"><label>Jacobs et al.(1992)</label><mixed-citation>
Jacobs, S., Hellmer, H., Doake, C., Jenkins, A., and Frolich, R.: Melting of
ice shelves and the mass balance of Antarctica, J. Glaciol., 38, 375–387,
1992.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib38"><label>Johns et al.(1997)Johns, Carnell, Crossley, Gregory, Mitchell,
Senior, Tett, and Wood</label><mixed-citation>
Johns, T. C., Carnell, R. E., Crossley, J. F., Gregory, J. M., Mitchell, J.
F. B., Senior, C. A., Tett, S. F. B., and Wood, R. A.: The second Hadley
Centre coupled ocean-atmosphere GCM: model description, spinup and
validation, Clim. Dynam., 13, 103–134, 1997.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib39"><label>Kageyama et al.(2013)</label><mixed-citation>
Kageyama, M., Merkel, U., Otto-Bliesner, B., Prange, M., Abe-Ouchi, A.,
Lohmann, G., Ohgaito, R., Roche, D. M., Singarayer, J., Swingedouw, D., and X
Zhang: Climatic impacts of fresh water hosing under Last Glacial Maximum
conditions: a multi-model study, Clim. Past, 9, 935–953,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/cp-9-935-2013" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/cp-9-935-2013</a>, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib40"><label>Krebs and   Timmermann(2007)</label><mixed-citation>
Krebs, U. and Timmermann, A.: Tropical air–sea interactions accelerate the
recovery of the Atlantic meridional overturning circulation after a major
shutdown, J. Climate, 20, 4940–4956, 2007.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib41"><label>Liu et al.(2009)</label><mixed-citation>
Liu, Z., Otto-Bliesner, B. L., He, F., Brady, E. C., Tomas, R., Clark, P. U.,
Carlson, A. E., Lynch-Stieglitz, J., Curry, W., Brook, E., Erickson, D.,
Jacob, R., Kutzbach, J., and Cheng, J.: Transient Simulation of Last
Deglaciation with a New Mechanism for Bølling-Allerød Warming, Science,
325, 310–314, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1171041" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1171041</a>, 2009.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib42"><label>Mairesse et al.(2013)</label><mixed-citation>
Mairesse, A., Goosse, H., Mathiot, P., Wanner, H., and Dubinkina, S.:
Investigating the consistency between proxy-based reconstructions and climate
models using data assimilation: a mid-Holocene case study, Clim. Past, 9,
2741–2757, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/cp-9-2741-2013" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/cp-9-2741-2013</a>, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib43"><label>Manabe et al.(1991)</label><mixed-citation>
Manabe, S., Stouffer, R., Spelman, M., and Bryan, K.: Transient responses of a
coupled ocean–atmosphere model to gradual changes of atmospheric CO<sub>2</sub>. Part
I. Annual mean response, J. Climate, 4, 785–818, 1991.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib44"><label>Marshall et al.(2007)</label><mixed-citation>
Marshall, S. J., Sharp, M. J., Burgess, D. O., and Anslow, F. S.:
Near-surface-temperature lapse rates on the Prince of Wales Icefield,
Ellesmere Island, Canada: implications for regional downscaling of
temperature, Int. J. Climatol., 27, 385–398,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/joc.1396" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/joc.1396</a>, 2007.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib45"><label>McManus et al.(2004)</label><mixed-citation>
McManus, J. F., Francois, R., Gherardi, J.-M., Keigwin, L. D., and Brown-Leger,
S.: Collapse and rapid resumption of Atlantic meridional circulation linked
to deglacial climate changes, Nature, 428, 834–837, 2004.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib46"><label>Monnin et al.(2001)</label><mixed-citation>
Monnin, E., Indermühle, A., Dällenbach, A., Flückiger, J.,
Stauffer, B., Stocker, T. F., Raynaud, D., and Barnola, J.-M.: Atmospheric
CO2 concentrations over the last glacial termination, Science, 291, 112–114,
2001.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib47"><label>Morzadec and Tarasov(2015)</label><mixed-citation>
Le Morzadec, K., Tarasov, L., Morlighem, M., and Seroussi, H.: A new sub-grid
surface mass balance and flux model for continental-scale ice sheet
modelling: testing and last glacial cycle, Geosci. Model Dev., 8, 3199–3213,
<a href="https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-8-3199-2015" target="_blank">https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-8-3199-2015</a>, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib48"><label>Nikolova et al.(2013)</label><mixed-citation>
Nikolova, I., Yin, Q., Berger, A., Singh, U. K., and Karami, M. P.: The last
interglacial (Eemian) climate simulated by LOVECLIM and CCSM3, Clim. Past, 9,
1789–1806, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/cp-9-1789-2013" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/cp-9-1789-2013</a>, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib49"><label>Opsteegh et al.(1998)Opsteegh, Haarsma, Selten, and
Kattenberg</label><mixed-citation>
Opsteegh, J. D., Haarsma, R. J., Selten, F. M., and Kattenberg, A.: ECBILT: a
dynamic alternative to mixed boundary conditions in ocean models, Tellus A,
50, 348–367, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0870.1998.t01-1-00007.x" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0870.1998.t01-1-00007.x</a>, 1998.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib50"><label>Otto-Bliesner and   Brady(2010)</label><mixed-citation>
Otto-Bliesner, B. L. and Brady, E. C.: The sensitivity of the climate response
to the magnitude and location of freshwater forcing: last glacial maximum
experiments, Quaternary Sci. Rev., 29, 56–73,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.quascirev.2009.07.004" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.quascirev.2009.07.004</a>, 2010.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib51"><label>Rahmstorf(1995)</label><mixed-citation>
Rahmstorf, S.: Bifurcations of the Atlantic thermohaline circulation in
response to changes in the hydrological cycle, Nature, 378, 145–149, 1995.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib52"><label>Rahmstorf et al.(2005)Rahmstorf, Crucifix, Ganopolski, Goosse,
Kamenkovich, Knutti, Lohmann, Marsh, Mysak, Wang
et al.</label><mixed-citation>
Rahmstorf, S., Crucifix, M., Ganopolski, A., Goosse, H., Kamenkovich, I., Knutti, R., Lohmann,
G., Marsh, R., Mysak, L. A. and  Wang, Z., and Weaver, A.J.:
Thermohaline circulation hysteresis: A model intercomparison, Geophys.
Res. Lett., 32, 23, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2005GL023655" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2005GL023655</a>, 2005.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib53"><label>Raper and   Braithwaite(2006)</label><mixed-citation>
Raper, S. C. and Braithwaite, R. J.: Low sea level rise projections from
mountain glaciers and icecaps under global warming, Nature, 439, 311–313, 2006.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib54"><label>Renssen et al.(2009)</label><mixed-citation>
Renssen, H., Seppä, H., Heiri, O., Roche, D., Goosse, H., and Fichefet, T.:
The spatial and temporal complexity of the Holocene thermal maximum, Nat.
Geosci., 2, 411–414, 2009.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib55"><label>Ridley et al.(2005)Ridley, Huybrechts, Gregory, and
Lowe</label><mixed-citation>
Ridley, J. K., Huybrechts, P., Gregory, J. M., and Lowe, J. A.: Elimination of
the Greenland Ice Sheet in a High CO<sub>2</sub> Climate, J. Climate, 18,
3409–3427, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI3482.1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI3482.1</a>, 2005.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib56"><label>Rind et al.(1989)Rind, Peteet, and
Kukla</label><mixed-citation>
Rind, D., Peteet, D., and Kukla, G.: Can Milankovitch orbital variations
initiate the growth of ice sheets in a general circulation model?, J.
Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 94, 12851–12871,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/JD094iD10p12851" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/JD094iD10p12851</a>, 1989.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib57"><label>Roberts et al.(2014)Roberts, Valdes, and
Payne</label><mixed-citation>
Roberts, W. H. G., Valdes, P. J., and Payne, A. J.:
Topography's crucial role in Heinrich Events, P.
Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 47, 16688–16693, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1414882111" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1414882111</a>, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib58"><label>Roche et al.(2007)Roche, Dokken, Goosse, Renssen, and
Weber</label><mixed-citation>
Roche, D. M., Dokken, T. M., Goosse, H., Renssen, H., and Weber, S. L.:
Climate of the Last Glacial Maximum: sensitivity studies and model-data
comparison with the LOVECLIM coupled model, Clim. Past, 3, 205–224,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/cp-3-205-2007" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/cp-3-205-2007</a>, 2007.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib59"><label>Roche et al.(2012)Roche, Crosta, and
Renssen</label><mixed-citation>
Roche, D. M., Crosta, X., and Renssen, H.: Evaluating Southern Ocean sea-ice for
the Last Glacial Maximum and pre-industrial climates: PMIP-2 models and data
evidence, Quaternary Sci. Rev., 56, 99–106, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib60"><label>Roche et al.(2014)</label><mixed-citation>
Roche, D. M., Dumas, C., Bügelmayer, M., Charbit, S., and Ritz, C.: Adding a
dynamical cryosphere to iLOVECLIM (version 1.0): coupling with the GRISLI
ice-sheet model, Geosci. Model Dev., 7, 1377–1394,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-7-1377-2014" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-7-1377-2014</a>, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib61"><label>Rossow(1996)</label><mixed-citation>
Rossow, W. B.: International Satellite Cloud Climatology Project (ISCCP): New
radiance calibrations, World Meteorological Organization, 1996.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib62"><label>Shaffer and   Bendtsen(1994)</label><mixed-citation>
Shaffer, G. and Bendtsen, J.: Role of the Bering Strait in controlling North
Atlantic ocean circulation and climate, Nature, 367, 354–357, 1994.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib63"><label>Stokes et al.(2012)</label><mixed-citation>
Stokes, C. R., Tarasov, L., and Dyke, A. S.: Dynamics of the North American Ice
Sheet Complex during its inception and build-up to the Last Glacial Maximum,
Quaternary Sci. Rev., 50, 86–104, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib64"><label>Stouffer et al.(2006)</label><mixed-citation>
Stouffer, R. J., Yin, J., Gregory, J. M., Dixon, K. W., Spelman, M. J., Hurlin,
W., Weaver, A. J., Eby, M., Flato, G. M., Hasumi, H., Hu, A., Jungclaus,
J. H., Kamenkovich, I. V., Levermann, A., Montoya, M., Murakami, S., Nawrath,
S., Oka, A., Peltier, W. R., Robitaille, D. Y., Sokolov, A., Vettoretti, G.,
and Weber, S. L.: Investigating the Causes of the Response of the
Thermohaline Circulation to Past and Future Climate Changes, J.
Climate, 19, 1365–1387, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI3689.1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI3689.1</a>,  2006.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib65"><label>Tarasov and Peltier(1997)</label><mixed-citation>
Tarasov, L. and Peltier, W. R.: A high-resolution model of the 100 kyr Ice Age
cycle, Ann. Glaciol., 25, 58–65, 1997.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib66"><label>Tarasov and Peltier(2002)</label><mixed-citation>
Tarasov, L. and Peltier, W. R.: Greenland glacial history and local
geodynamic consequences, Geophys. J. Int., 150, 198–229, 2002.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib67"><label>Tarasov and Peltier(2006)</label><mixed-citation>
Tarasov, L. and Peltier, W. R.: A calibrated deglacial drainage chronology for
the North American continent: Evidence of an Arctic trigger for the
Younger Dryas, Quaternary Sci. Rev., 25, 659–688, 2006.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib68"><label>Tarasov and Peltier(2007)</label><mixed-citation>
Tarasov, L. and Peltier, W. R.: The Co-evolution of continental ice cover and
permafrost extent over the last glacial-interglacial cycle in North
America, J. Geophys. Res.-Earth Surf., 112, F02S08, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2006JF000661" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2006JF000661</a>, 2007.

</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib69"><label>Tarasov et al.(2012)Tarasov, Dyke, Neal, and Peltier</label><mixed-citation>
Tarasov, L., Dyke, A. S., Neal, R. M., and Peltier, W. R.: A data-calibrated
distribution of deglacial chronologies for the North American ice complex
from glaciological modeling, Earth Planet. Sci.  Lett., 315–316, 30–40, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib70"><label>Thomas et al.(2003)</label><mixed-citation>
Thomas, R. H., Abdalati, W., Frederick, E., Krabill, W. B., Manizade, S., and
Steffen, K.: Investigation of surface melting and dynamic thinning on
Jakobshavn Isbræ, Greenland, J. Glaciol., 49, 231–239,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.3189/172756503781830764" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.3189/172756503781830764</a>, 2003.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib71"><label>Timmermann et al.(2003)</label><mixed-citation>
Timmermann, A., Gildor, H., Schulz, M., and Tziperman, E.: Coherent Resonant
Millennial-Scale Climate Oscillations Triggered by Massive Meltwater Pulses,
J. Climate, 16, 2569–2585,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0442(2003)016&lt;2569:CRMCOT&gt;2.0.CO;2" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0442(2003)016&lt;2569:CRMCOT&gt;2.0.CO;2</a>, 2003.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib72"><label>van den Broeke et al.(2008)</label><mixed-citation>
van den Broeke, M., Smeets, P., Ettema, J., and Munneke, P. K.: Surface
radiation balance in the ablation zone of the west Greenland ice sheet,
J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 113, D13105, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2007JD009283" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2007JD009283</a>, 2008.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib73"><label>van Meerbeeck et al.(2009)</label><mixed-citation>
Van Meerbeeck, C. J., Renssen, H., and Roche, D. M.: How did Marine Isotope
Stage 3 and Last Glacial Maximum climates differ? – Perspectives from
equilibrium simulations, Clim. Past, 5, 33–51,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/cp-5-33-2009" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/cp-5-33-2009</a>, 2009.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib74"><label>Walsh et al.(2015)Walsh, Chapman, and
Fetterer</label><mixed-citation>
Walsh, J., Chapman, W., and Fetterer, F.: Gridded Monthly Sea Ice Extent and
Concentration, 1850 Onward, Version 1, Tech. rep., NSIDC: National Snow and
Ice Data Center, Boulder, Colorado USA, <a href="https://doi.org/10.7265/N5833PZ5" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.7265/N5833PZ5</a>, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib75"><label>Widmann et al.(2010)Widmann, Goosse, van der Schrier, Schnur, and
Barkmeijer</label><mixed-citation>
Widmann, M., Goosse, H., van der Schrier, G., Schnur, R., and Barkmeijer, J.:
Using data assimilation to study extratropical Northern Hemisphere climate
over the last millennium, Clim. Past, 6, 627–644,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/cp-6-627-2010" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/cp-6-627-2010</a>, 2010.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib76"><label>Xu et al.(2013)Xu, Rignot, Fenty, Menemenlis, and
Flexas</label><mixed-citation>
Xu, Y., Rignot, E., Fenty, I., Menemenlis, D., and Flexas, M. M.: Subaqueous
melting of Store Glacier, west Greenland from three-dimensional,
high-resolution numerical modeling and ocean observations, Geophys.
Res. Lett., 40, 4648–4653, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/grl.50825" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/grl.50825</a>,  2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib77"><label>Xun et al.(2013)Xun, Gregor, Gerrit, and
Xu</label><mixed-citation>
Xun, G., Gregor, K., Gerrit, L., and Xu, Z.: Dependence of abrupt Atlantic
meridional ocean circulation changes on climate background states,
Geophys. Res. Lett., 40, 3698–3704, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/grl.50701" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/grl.50701</a>,  2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib78"><label>Yin et al.(2014)</label><mixed-citation>
Yin, Q., Berger, A., Ganopolski, A., Goelzer, H., Guo, Z., and
Huybrechts, P.: Ice sheets, insolation and CO<sub>2</sub> during the interglacial
MIS-13, in: EGU General Assembly Conference Abstracts, Vol. 16, EGU
General Assembly Conference Abstracts, p. 2910, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>--></article>
