Articles | Volume 12, issue 7
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-3099-2019
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-3099-2019
Model evaluation paper
 | 
19 Jul 2019
Model evaluation paper |  | 19 Jul 2019

Progress towards a probabilistic Earth system model: examining the impact of stochasticity in the atmosphere and land component of EC-Earth v3.2

Kristian Strommen, Hannah M. Christensen, Dave MacLeod, Stephan Juricke, and Tim N. Palmer

Related authors

Southern Annular Mode Persistence and Westerly Jet: A Reassessment Using High-Resolution Global Models
Ting-Chen Chen, Hugues Goosse, Matthias Aengenheyster, Kristian Strommen, Christopher Roberts, Malcolm Roberts, Rohit Ghosh, Jin-Song von Storch, and Stephy Libera
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-666,https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-666, 2025
This preprint is open for discussion and under review for Weather and Climate Dynamics (WCD).
Short summary
Predictable decadal forcing of the North Atlantic jet speed by sub-polar North Atlantic sea surface temperatures
Kristian Strommen, Tim Woollings, Paolo Davini, Paolo Ruggieri, and Isla R. Simpson
Weather Clim. Dynam., 4, 853–874, https://doi.org/10.5194/wcd-4-853-2023,https://doi.org/10.5194/wcd-4-853-2023, 2023
Short summary
Improved teleconnection between Arctic sea ice and the North Atlantic Oscillation through stochastic process representation
Kristian Strommen, Stephan Juricke, and Fenwick Cooper
Weather Clim. Dynam., 3, 951–975, https://doi.org/10.5194/wcd-3-951-2022,https://doi.org/10.5194/wcd-3-951-2022, 2022
Short summary
Quantifying climate model representation of the wintertime Euro-Atlantic circulation using geopotential-jet regimes
Joshua Dorrington, Kristian Strommen, and Federico Fabiano
Weather Clim. Dynam., 3, 505–533, https://doi.org/10.5194/wcd-3-505-2022,https://doi.org/10.5194/wcd-3-505-2022, 2022
Short summary

Related subject area

Climate and Earth system modeling
A new metrics framework for quantifying and intercomparing atmospheric rivers in observations, reanalyses, and climate models
Bo Dong, Paul Ullrich, Jiwoo Lee, Peter Gleckler, Kristin Chang, and Travis A. O'Brien
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 961–976, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-961-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-961-2025, 2025
Short summary
The real challenges for climate and weather modelling on its way to sustained exascale performance: a case study using ICON (v2.6.6)
Panagiotis Adamidis, Erik Pfister, Hendryk Bockelmann, Dominik Zobel, Jens-Olaf Beismann, and Marek Jacob
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 905–919, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-905-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-905-2025, 2025
Short summary
Improving the representation of major Indian crops in the Community Land Model version 5.0 (CLM5) using site-scale crop data
Kangari Narender Reddy, Somnath Baidya Roy, Sam S. Rabin, Danica L. Lombardozzi, Gudimetla Venkateswara Varma, Ruchira Biswas, and Devavat Chiru Naik
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 763–785, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-763-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-763-2025, 2025
Short summary
Evaluation of CORDEX ERA5-forced NARCliM2.0 regional climate models over Australia using the Weather Research and Forecasting (WRF) model version 4.1.2
Giovanni Di Virgilio, Fei Ji, Eugene Tam, Jason P. Evans, Jatin Kala, Julia Andrys, Christopher Thomas, Dipayan Choudhury, Carlos Rocha, Yue Li, and Matthew L. Riley
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 703–724, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-703-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-703-2025, 2025
Short summary
Design, evaluation, and future projections of the NARCliM2.0 CORDEX-CMIP6 Australasia regional climate ensemble
Giovanni Di Virgilio, Jason P. Evans, Fei Ji, Eugene Tam, Jatin Kala, Julia Andrys, Christopher Thomas, Dipayan Choudhury, Carlos Rocha, Stephen White, Yue Li, Moutassem El Rafei, Rishav Goyal, Matthew L. Riley, and Jyothi Lingala
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 671–702, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-671-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-671-2025, 2025
Short summary

Cited articles

Arakawa, A. and Schubert, W. H.: Interaction of a cumulus cloud ensemble with the large scale environment, Part I, J. Atmos. Sci., 31, 674–701, https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0469(1974)031<0674:IOACCE>2.0.CO;2, 1974. a
Baldwin, M. P., Gray, L. J., Dunkerton, T. J., Hamilton, K., Haynes, P. H., Randel, W. J., Holton, J. R., Alexander, M. J., Hirota, I., Horinouchi, T., Jones, D. B., Kinnersley, J. S., Marquardt, C., Sato, K., and Takahashi, M.: The quasi-biennial oscillation, Rev. Geophys., 39, 179–229, https://doi.org/10.1029/1999RG000073, 2001. a
Balsamo, G., Beljaars, A., Scipal, K., Viterbo, P., van den Hurk, B., Hirschi, M., and Betts, A. K.: A Revised Hydrology for the ECMWF Model: Verification from Field Site to Terrestrial Water Storage and Impact in the Integrated Forecast System, J. Hydrometeorol., 10, 623–643, https://doi.org/10.1175/2008JHM1068.1, 2009. a, b
Bauer, P., Thorpe, A., and Brunet, G.: The quiet revolution of numerical weather prediction, Nature, 525, 47–55, https://doi.org/10.1038/nature14956, 2015. a
Beljaars, A. E. A.: The numerics of physical parametrization, in: Seminar on recent developments in numerical methods for atmospheric and ocean modelling, ECMW, 113–134, 2004. a
Download
Short summary
Due to computational limitations, climate models cannot fully resolve the laws of physics below a certain scale – a large source of errors and uncertainty. Stochastic schemes aim to account for this by randomly sampling the possible unresolved states. We develop new stochastic schemes for the EC-Earth climate model and evaluate their impact on model performance. While several benefits are found, the impact is sometimes too strong, suggesting such schemes must be carefully calibrated before use.
Share