Articles | Volume 13, issue 5
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-2487-2020
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-2487-2020
Methods for assessment of models
 | 
29 May 2020
Methods for assessment of models |  | 29 May 2020

Correcting a bias in a climate model with an augmented emulator

Doug McNeall, Jonny Williams, Richard Betts, Ben Booth, Peter Challenor, Peter Good, and Andy Wiltshire

Related authors

A rapid-application emissions-to-impacts tool for scenario assessment: Probabilistic Regional Impacts from Model patterns and Emissions (PRIME)
Camilla Mathison, Eleanor J. Burke, Gregory Munday, Chris D. Jones, Chris J. Smith, Norman J. Steinert, Andy J. Wiltshire, Chris Huntingford, Eszter Kovacs, Laila K. Gohar, Rebecca M. Varney, and Douglas McNeall
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 1785–1808, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-1785-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-1785-2025, 2025
Short summary
Constraining the carbon cycle in JULES-ES-1.0
Douglas McNeall, Eddy Robertson, and Andy Wiltshire
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 1059–1089, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-1059-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-1059-2024, 2024
Short summary
The impact of structural error on parameter constraint in a climate model
Doug McNeall, Jonny Williams, Ben Booth, Richard Betts, Peter Challenor, Andy Wiltshire, and David Sexton
Earth Syst. Dynam., 7, 917–935, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-7-917-2016,https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-7-917-2016, 2016
Short summary
The mechanisms of North Atlantic CO2 uptake in a large Earth System Model ensemble
P. R. Halloran, B. B. B. Booth, C. D. Jones, F. H. Lambert, D. J. McNeall, I. J. Totterdell, and C. Völker
Biogeosciences, 12, 4497–4508, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-12-4497-2015,https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-12-4497-2015, 2015
Short summary
The potential of an observational data set for calibration of a computationally expensive computer model
D. J. McNeall, P. G. Challenor, J. R. Gattiker, and E. J. Stone
Geosci. Model Dev., 6, 1715–1728, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-6-1715-2013,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-6-1715-2013, 2013

Related subject area

Climate and Earth system modeling
ICON-HAM-lite 1.0: simulating the Earth system with interactive aerosols at kilometer scales
Philipp Weiss, Ross Herbert, and Philip Stier
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 3877–3894, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-3877-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-3877-2025, 2025
Short summary
Process-based modeling framework for sustainable irrigation management at the regional scale: integrating rice production, water use, and greenhouse gas emissions
Yan Bo, Hao Liang, Tao Li, and Feng Zhou
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 3799–3817, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-3799-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-3799-2025, 2025
Short summary
Implementing deep soil and dynamic root uptake in Noah-MP (v4.5): impact on Amazon dry-season transpiration
Carolina A. Bieri, Francina Dominguez, Gonzalo Miguez-Macho, and Ying Fan
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 3755–3779, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-3755-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-3755-2025, 2025
Short summary
Reducing time and computing costs in EC-Earth: an automatic load-balancing approach for coupled Earth system models
Sergi Palomas, Mario C. Acosta, Gladys Utrera, and Etienne Tourigny
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 3661–3679, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-3661-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-3661-2025, 2025
Short summary
FLAME 1.0: a novel approach for modelling burned area in the Brazilian biomes using the maximum entropy concept
Maria Lucia Ferreira Barbosa, Douglas I. Kelley, Chantelle A. Burton, Igor J. M. Ferreira, Renata Moura da Veiga, Anna Bradley, Paulo Guilherme Molin, and Liana O. Anderson
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 3533–3557, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-3533-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-3533-2025, 2025
Short summary

Cited articles

Adler, R. F., Huffman, G. J., Chang, A., Ferraro, R., Xie, P.-P., Janowiak, J., Rudolf, B., Schneider, U., Curtis, S., Bolvin, D., Gruber, A., Susskind, J., Arkin, P., and Nelkin, E.: The Version-2 Global Precipitation Climatology Project (GPCP) Monthly Precipitation Analysis (1979–Present), J. Hydrometeorol., 4, 1147–1167, https://doi.org/10.1175/1525-7541(2003)004<1147:TVGPCP>2.0.CO;2, 2003. a
Andrianakis, I., Vernon, I. R., McCreesh, N., McKinley, T. J., Oakley, J. E., Nsubuga, R. N., Goldstein, M., and White, R. G.: Bayesian history matching of complex infectious disease models using emulation: a tutorial and a case study on HIV in Uganda, PLoS Comput. Biol., 11, e1003968, https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1003968, 2015. a
Arendt, P. D., Apley, D. W., and Chen, W.: Quantification of model uncertainty: Calibration, model discrepancy, and identifiability, J. Mech. Design, 134, 100908, https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4007390, 2012a. a
Arendt, P. D., Apley, D. W., Chen, W., Lamb, D., and Gorsich, D.: Improving identifiability in model calibration using multiple responses, J. Mech. Design, 134, 100909, https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4007573, 2012b. a
Betts, R. A., Boucher O., Collins M., Cox, P. M., Falloon P. D., Gedney N., Hemming D. L., Huntingford C., Jones C. D., Sexton D. M., and Webb M. J.: Projected increase in continental runoff due to plant responses to increasing carbon dioxide, Nature, 448, 1037–1041, https://doi.org/10.1038/nature06045, 2007.  a
Download
Short summary
In the climate model FAMOUS, matching the modelled Amazon rainforest to observations required different land surface parameter settings than for other forests. It was unclear if this discrepancy was due to a bias in the modelled climate or an error in the land surface component of the model. Correcting the climate of the model with a statistical model corrects the simulation of the Amazon forest, suggesting that the land surface component of the model is not the source of the discrepancy.
Share