Articles | Volume 12, issue 5
Geosci. Model Dev., 12, 2107–2117, 2019
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-2107-2019
Geosci. Model Dev., 12, 2107–2117, 2019
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-2107-2019

Methods for assessment of models 29 May 2019

Methods for assessment of models | 29 May 2019

Convective response to large-scale forcing in the tropical western Pacific simulated by spCAM5 and CanAM4.3

Toni Mitovski et al.

Related authors

What rainfall rates are most important to wet removal of different aerosol types?
Yong Wang, Wenwen Xia, and Guang J. Zhang
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 16797–16816, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-16797-2021,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-16797-2021, 2021
Short summary
Effects of forcing differences and initial conditions on inter-model agreement in the VolMIP volc-pinatubo-full experiment
Davide Zanchettin, Claudia Timmreck, Myriam Khodri, Anja Schmidt, Matthew Toohey, Manabu Abe, Slimane Bekki, Jason Cole, Shih-Wei Fang, Wuhu Feng, Gabriele Hegerl, Ben Johnson, Nicolas Lebas, Allegra N. LeGrande, Graham W. Mann, Lauren Marshall, Landon Rieger, Alan Robock, Sara Rubinetti, Kostas Tsigaridis, and Helen Weierbach
Geosci. Model Dev. Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-2021-372,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-2021-372, 2021
Preprint under review for GMD
Short summary
Stable climate simulations using a realistic GCM with neural network parameterizations for atmospheric moist physics and radiation processes
Xin Wang, Yilun Han, Wei Xue, Guangwen Yang, and Guang J. Zhang
Geosci. Model Dev. Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-2021-299,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-2021-299, 2021
Revised manuscript under review for GMD
Short summary
Cloud Feedbacks from CanESM2 to CanESM5.0 and their influence on climate sensitivity
John G. Virgin, Christopher G. Fletcher, Jason N. S. Cole, Knut von Salzen, and Toni Mitovski
Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 5355–5372, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-5355-2021,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-5355-2021, 2021
Short summary
Evaluation of a Quasi-steady state approximation of the cloud Droplet Growth Equation (QDGE) scheme for aerosol activation in global models using multiple aircraft data over both continental and marine environments
Hengqi Wang, Yiran Peng, Knut von Salzen, Yan Yang, Wei Zhou, and Delong Zhao
Geosci. Model Dev. Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-2021-148,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-2021-148, 2021
Revised manuscript under review for GMD
Short summary

Related subject area

Atmospheric sciences
Development of aerosol optical properties for improving the MESSy photolysis module in the GEM-MACH v2.4 air quality model and application for calculating photolysis rates in a biomass burning plume
Mahtab Majdzadeh, Craig A. Stroud, Christopher Sioris, Paul A. Makar, Ayodeji Akingunola, Chris McLinden, Xiaoyi Zhao, Michael D. Moran, Ihab Abboud, and Jack Chen
Geosci. Model Dev., 15, 219–249, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-219-2022,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-219-2022, 2022
Short summary
The sensitivity of simulated aerosol climatic impact to domain size using regional model (WRF-Chem v3.6)
Xiaodong Wang, Chun Zhao, Mingyue Xu, Qiuyan Du, Jianqiu Zheng, Yun Bi, Shengfu Lin, and Yali Luo
Geosci. Model Dev., 15, 199–218, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-199-2022,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-199-2022, 2022
Short summary
WOMBAT v1.0: a fully Bayesian global flux-inversion framework
Andrew Zammit-Mangion, Michael Bertolacci, Jenny Fisher, Ann Stavert, Matthew Rigby, Yi Cao, and Noel Cressie
Geosci. Model Dev., 15, 45–73, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-45-2022,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-45-2022, 2022
Short summary
Analysis of the MODIS above-cloud aerosol retrieval algorithm using MCARS
Galina Wind, Arlindo M. da Silva, Kerry G. Meyer, Steven Platnick, and Peter M. Norris
Geosci. Model Dev., 15, 1–14, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-1-2022,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-1-2022, 2022
Short summary
How well can inverse analyses of high-resolution satellite data resolve heterogeneous methane fluxes? Observing system simulation experiments with the GEOS-Chem adjoint model (v35)
Xueying Yu, Dylan B. Millet, and Daven K. Henze
Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 7775–7793, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-7775-2021,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-7775-2021, 2021
Short summary

Cited articles

Bechtold, P., Bazile, E., Guichard, F., Mascart, P., and Richard, E.: A mass-flux convection scheme for regional and global models, Q. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc., 127, 869–886, 2001. 
Boyle, J. and Klein, S. A.: Impact of horizontal resolution on climate model forecasts of tropical precipitation and diabatic heating for the TWP-ICE period, J. Geophys. Res., 115, D23113, https://doi.org/10.1029/2010JD014262, 2010. 
Dai, A.: Precipitation characteristics in eighteen coupled climate models, J. Climate, 19, 4605–4630, https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI3884.1, 2006 
DeMott, C., Randall, D. A., and Khairoutdinov, M.: Convective precipitation variability as a tool for general circulation model analysis, J. Climate, 20, 91–112, https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI3991.1, 2007. 
Donner, L. J.: A cumulus parameterization including mass fluxes, vertical momentum dynamics, and mesoscale effects, J. Atmos. Sci., 50, 889–906, https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0469(1993)050<0889:ACPIMF>2.0.CO;2, 1993. 
Download
Short summary
Changes in the large-scale environment during convective precipitation events simulated by the Canadian Atmospheric Model (CanAM4.3) are compared against those simulated by the super-parameterized Community Atmosphere Model (spCAM5). Compared to spCAM5, CanAM4.3 underestimates the frequency of extreme convective precipitation and the duration of convective events are 50 % shorter. The dependence of precipitation on changes in the large-scale environment differs between CanAM4.3 and spCAM5.