Articles | Volume 11, issue 10
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-4195-2018
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-4195-2018
Methods for assessment of models
 | 
16 Oct 2018
Methods for assessment of models |  | 16 Oct 2018

(GO)2-SIM: a GCM-oriented ground-observation forward-simulator framework for objective evaluation of cloud and precipitation phase

Katia Lamer, Ann M. Fridlind, Andrew S. Ackerman, Pavlos Kollias, Eugene E. Clothiaux, and Maxwell Kelley

Related authors

Orbital-Radar v1.0.0: a tool to transform suborbital radar observations to synthetic EarthCARE cloud radar data
Lukas Pfitzenmaier, Pavlos Kollias, Nils Risse, Imke Schirmacher, Bernat Puigdomenech Treserras, and Katia Lamer
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 101–115, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-101-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-101-2025, 2025
Short summary
Detection of small drizzle droplets in a large cloud chamber using ultrahigh-resolution radar
Zeen Zhu, Fan Yang, Pavlos Kollias, Raymond A. Shaw, Alex B. Kostinski, Steve Krueger, Katia Lamer, Nithin Allwayin, and Mariko Oue
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 17, 1133–1143, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-17-1133-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-17-1133-2024, 2024
Short summary
Assessing Arctic low-level clouds and precipitation from above – a radar perspective
Imke Schirmacher, Pavlos Kollias, Katia Lamer, Mario Mech, Lukas Pfitzenmaier, Manfred Wendisch, and Susanne Crewell
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 16, 4081–4100, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-16-4081-2023,https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-16-4081-2023, 2023
Short summary
Multifrequency radar observations of clouds and precipitation including the G-band
Katia Lamer, Mariko Oue, Alessandro Battaglia, Richard J. Roy, Ken B. Cooper, Ranvir Dhillon, and Pavlos Kollias
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 14, 3615–3629, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-14-3615-2021,https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-14-3615-2021, 2021
Short summary
Mind the gap – Part 2: Improving quantitative estimates of cloud and rain water path in oceanic warm rain using spaceborne radars
Alessandro Battaglia, Pavlos Kollias, Ranvir Dhillon, Katia Lamer, Marat Khairoutdinov, and Daniel Watters
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 13, 4865–4883, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-13-4865-2020,https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-13-4865-2020, 2020
Short summary

Related subject area

Atmospheric sciences
Accurate space-based NOx emission estimates with the flux divergence approach require fine-scale model information on local oxidation chemistry and profile shapes
Felipe Cifuentes, Henk Eskes, Enrico Dammers, Charlotte Bryan, and Folkert Boersma
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 621–649, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-621-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-621-2025, 2025
Short summary
Exploring a high-level programming model for the NWP domain using ECMWF microphysics schemes
Stefano Ubbiali, Christian Kühnlein, Christoph Schär, Linda Schlemmer, Thomas C. Schulthess, Michael Staneker, and Heini Wernli
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 529–546, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-529-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-529-2025, 2025
Short summary
Quantifying uncertainties in satellite NO2 superobservations for data assimilation and model evaluation
Pieter Rijsdijk, Henk Eskes, Arlene Dingemans, K. Folkert Boersma, Takashi Sekiya, Kazuyuki Miyazaki, and Sander Houweling
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 483–509, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-483-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-483-2025, 2025
Short summary
ML-AMPSIT: Machine Learning-based Automated Multi-method Parameter Sensitivity and Importance analysis Tool
Dario Di Santo, Cenlin He, Fei Chen, and Lorenzo Giovannini
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 433–459, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-433-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-433-2025, 2025
Short summary
Coupling the urban canopy model TEB (SURFEXv9.0) with the radiation model SPARTACUS-Urbanv0.6.1 for more realistic urban radiative exchange calculation
Robert Schoetter, Robin James Hogan, Cyril Caliot, and Valéry Masson
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 405–431, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-405-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-405-2025, 2025
Short summary

Cited articles

Atlas, D.: The estimation of cloud parameters by radar, J. Meteorol., 11, 309–317, 1954. 
Atlas, D., Matrosov, S. Y., Heymsfield, A. J., Chou, M.-D., and Wolff, D. B.: Radar and radiation properties of ice clouds, J. Appl. Meteorol., 34, 2329–2345, 1995. 
Battaglia, A. and Delanoë, J.: Synergies and complementarities of CloudSat-CALIPSO snow observations, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 118, 721–731, 2013. 
Battan, L. J.: Radar observation of the atmosphere, University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois, 1973. 
Bodas-Salcedo, A., Webb, M., Bony, S., Chepfer, H., Dufresne, J.-L., Klein, S., Zhang, Y., Marchand, R., Haynes, J., and Pincus, R.: COSP: Satellite simulation software for model assessment, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 92, 1023–1043, 2011. 
Download
Short summary
Weather and climate predictions of cloud, rain, and snow occurrence remain uncertain, in part because guidance from observation is incomplete. We present a tool that transforms predictions into observations from ground-based remote sensors. Liquid water and ice occurrence errors associated with the transformation are below 8 %, with ~ 3 % uncertainty. This (GO)2-SIM forward-simulator tool enables better evaluation of cloud, rain, and snow occurrence predictions using available observations.
Share