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
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
SASIEv.1: a framework for seasonal and multi-centennial Arctic sea ice emulation
Sian Megan Chilcott, Malte Meinshausen, and Dirk Notz
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 4965–4982, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-4965-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-4965-2025, 2025
Short summary
COSP-RTTOV-1.0: flexible radiation diagnostics to enable new science applications in model evaluation, climate change detection, and satellite mission design
Jonah K. Shaw, Dustin J. Swales, Sergio DeSouza-Machado, David D. Turner, Jennifer E. Kay, and David P. Schneider
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 4935–4950, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-4935-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-4935-2025, 2025
Short summary
Assessing modifications to the Abdul-Razzak and Ghan aerosol activation parameterization (version ARG2000) to improve simulated aerosol–cloud radiative effects in the UK Met Office Unified Model (UM version 13.0)
Pratapaditya Ghosh, Katherine J. Evans, Daniel P. Grosvenor, Hyun-Gyu Kang, Salil Mahajan, Min Xu, Wei Zhang, and Hamish Gordon
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 4899–4913, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-4899-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-4899-2025, 2025
Short summary
Correction of sea surface biases in the NEMO ocean general circulation model using neural networks
Andrea Storto, Sergey Frolov, Laura Slivinski, and Chunxue Yang
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 4789–4804, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-4789-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-4789-2025, 2025
Short summary
Representing lateral groundwater flow from land to river in Earth system models
Chang Liao, L. Ruby Leung, Yilin Fang, Teklu Tesfa, and Robinson Negron-Juarez
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 4601–4624, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-4601-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-4601-2025, 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