Articles | Volume 13, issue 7
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-2945-2020
© Author(s) 2020. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-2945-2020
© Author(s) 2020. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Methods for assessment of models
| 
07 Jul 2020
Methods for assessment of models |
| 07 Jul 2020
| 07 Jul 2020
Observations for Model Intercomparison Project (Obs4MIPs): status for CMIP6
Duane Waliser
CORRESPONDING AUTHOR
Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology,
Pasadena, California, USA
Peter J. Gleckler
CORRESPONDING AUTHOR
Program for Climate Model Diagnostics and Intercomparison, Lawrence
Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, California, USA
Robert Ferraro
Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology,
Pasadena, California, USA
Karl E. Taylor
Program for Climate Model Diagnostics and Intercomparison, Lawrence
Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, California, USA
Sasha Ames
Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, California, USA
James Biard
North Carolina Institute for Climate Studies, North Carolina State
University, Asheville, North Carolina, USA
Michael G. Bosilovich
Goddard Space Flight Center, National Aeronautics and Space
Administration, Greenbelt, Maryland, USA
Otis Brown
North Carolina Institute for Climate Studies, North Carolina State
University, Asheville, North Carolina, USA
Helene Chepfer
Laboratoire de Météorologie Dynamique/Institut Pierre Simon
Laplace, Université Pierre et Marie Curie, Paris, France
Luca Cinquini
Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology,
Pasadena, California, USA
Earth System Research Laboratory, National Ocean and Atmospheric
Administration, Boulder, Colorado, USA
Paul J. Durack
Program for Climate Model Diagnostics and Intercomparison, Lawrence
Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, California, USA
Veronika Eyring
Deutsches Zentrum für Luft- und Raumfahrt, Institut für Physik
der Atmosphäre, Oberpfaffenhofen, Germany
Institute of Environmental Physics (IUP),
University of Bremen, Bremen, Germany
Pierre-Philippe Mathieu
Climate Office, European Space Agency, Harwell, UK
Tsengdar Lee
Earth Science Division, National Aeronautics and Space
Administration, Washington, DC, USA
Simon Pinnock
Climate Office, European Space Agency, Harwell, UK
Gerald L. Potter
Goddard Space Flight Center, National Aeronautics and Space
Administration, Greenbelt, Maryland, USA
Michel Rixen
World Climate Research Programme, World Meteorological Organization,
Geneva, Switzerland
Roger Saunders
Met Office, Exeter, UK
Jörg Schulz
European Organisation for the Exploitation of Meteorological
Satellites (EUMETSAT), Darmstadt,
Germany
Jean-Noël Thépaut
European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts, Reading, UK
Matthias Tuma
World Climate Research Programme, World Meteorological Organization,
Geneva, Switzerland
Related authors
Christine A. Shields, Jonathan J. Rutz, Lai-Yung Leung, F. Martin Ralph, Michael Wehner, Brian Kawzenuk, Juan M. Lora, Elizabeth McClenny, Tashiana Osborne, Ashley E. Payne, Paul Ullrich, Alexander Gershunov, Naomi Goldenson, Bin Guan, Yun Qian, Alexandre M. Ramos, Chandan Sarangi, Scott Sellars, Irina Gorodetskaya, Karthik Kashinath, Vitaliy Kurlin, Kelly Mahoney, Grzegorz Muszynski, Roger Pierce, Aneesh C. Subramanian, Ricardo Tome, Duane Waliser, Daniel Walton, Gary Wick, Anna Wilson, David Lavers, Prabhat, Allison Collow, Harinarayan Krishnan, Gudrun Magnusdottir, and Phu Nguyen
Geosci. Model Dev., 11, 2455–2474, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-2455-2018, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-2455-2018, 2018
Short summary
Short summary
ARTMIP (Atmospheric River Tracking Method Intercomparison Project) is a community effort with the explicit goal of understanding the uncertainties, and the implications of those uncertainties, in atmospheric river science solely due to detection algorithm. ARTMIP strives to quantify these differences and provide guidance on appropriate algorithmic choices for the science question posed. Project goals, experimental design, and preliminary results are provided.
Bjorn Stevens, Stefan Adami, Tariq Ali, Hartwig Anzt, Zafer Aslan, Sabine Attinger, Jaana Bäck, Johanna Baehr, Peter Bauer, Natacha Bernier, Bob Bishop, Hendryk Bockelmann, Sandrine Bony, Guy Brasseur, David N. Bresch, Sean Breyer, Gilbert Brunet, Pier Luigi Buttigieg, Junji Cao, Christelle Castet, Yafang Cheng, Ayantika Dey Choudhury, Deborah Coen, Susanne Crewell, Atish Dabholkar, Qing Dai, Francisco Doblas-Reyes, Dale Durran, Ayoub El Gaidi, Charlie Ewen, Eleftheria Exarchou, Veronika Eyring, Florencia Falkinhoff, David Farrell, Piers M. Forster, Ariane Frassoni, Claudia Frauen, Oliver Fuhrer, Shahzad Gani, Edwin Gerber, Debra Goldfarb, Jens Grieger, Nicolas Gruber, Wilco Hazeleger, Rolf Herken, Chris Hewitt, Torsten Hoefler, Huang-Hsiung Hsu, Daniela Jacob, Alexandra Jahn, Christian Jakob, Thomas Jung, Christopher Kadow, In-Sik Kang, Sarah Kang, Karthik Kashinath, Katharina Kleinen-von Königslöw, Daniel Klocke, Uta Kloenne, Milan Klöwer, Chihiro Kodama, Stefan Kollet, Tobias Kölling, Jenni Kontkanen, Steve Kopp, Michal Koran, Markku Kulmala, Hanna Lappalainen, Fakhria Latifi, Bryan Lawrence, June Yi Lee, Quentin Lejeun, Christian Lessig, Chao Li, Thomas Lippert, Jürg Luterbacher, Pekka Manninen, Jochem Marotzke, Satoshi Matsouoka, Charlotte Merchant, Peter Messmer, Gero Michel, Kristel Michielsen, Tomoki Miyakawa, Jens Müller, Ramsha Munir, Sandeep Narayanasetti, Ousmane Ndiaye, Carlos Nobre, Achim Oberg, Riko Oki, Tuba Özkan-Haller, Tim Palmer, Stan Posey, Andreas Prein, Odessa Primus, Mike Pritchard, Julie Pullen, Dian Putrasahan, Johannes Quaas, Krishnan Raghavan, Venkatachalam Ramaswamy, Markus Rapp, Florian Rauser, Markus Reichstein, Aromar Revi, Sonakshi Saluja, Masaki Satoh, Vera Schemann, Sebastian Schemm, Christina Schnadt Poberaj, Thomas Schulthess, Cath Senior, Jagadish Shukla, Manmeet Singh, Julia Slingo, Adam Sobel, Silvina Solman, Jenna Spitzer, Philip Stier, Thomas Stocker, Sarah Strock, Hang Su, Petteri Taalas, John Taylor, Susann Tegtmeier, Georg Teutsch, Adrian Tompkins, Uwe Ulbrich, Pier-Luigi Vidale, Chien-Ming Wu, Hao Xu, Najibullah Zaki, Laure Zanna, Tianjun Zhou, and Florian Ziemen
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 16, 2113–2122, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-16-2113-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-16-2113-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
To manage Earth in the Anthropocene, new tools, new institutions, and new forms of international cooperation will be required. Earth Virtualization Engines is proposed as an international federation of centers of excellence to empower all people to respond to the immense and urgent challenges posed by climate change.
Bettina K. Gier, Manuel Schlund, Pierre Friedlingstein, Chris D. Jones, Colin Jones, Sönke Zaehle, and Veronika Eyring
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-277, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-277, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
This study investigates present day carbon cycle variables in CMIP5 and CMIP6 simulations. A significant improvement in the simulation of photosynthesis in models with nitrogen cycle is found, as well as only small differences between emission and concentration based simulations. Thus, we recommend the use of emission driven simulations in CMIP7 as default setup, and to view the nitrogen cycle as a necessary part of all future carbon cycle models.
Colin Gareth Jones, Fanny Adloff, Ben Booth, Peter Cox, Veronika Eyring, Pierre Friedlingstein, Katja Frieler, Helene Hewitt, Hazel Jeffery, Sylvie Joussaume, Torben Koenigk, Bryan N. Lawrence, Eleanor O'Rourke, Malcolm Roberts, Benjamin Sanderson, Roland Séférian, Samuel Somot, Pier-Luigi Vidale, Detlef van Vuuren, Mario Acosta, Mats Bentsen, Raffaele Bernardello, Richard Betts, Ed Blockley, Julien Boé, Tom Bracegirdle, Pascale Braconnot, Victor Brovkin, Carlo Buontempo, Francisco J. Doblas-Reyes, Markus G. Donat, Italo Epicoco, Pete Falloon, Sandro Fiore, Thomas Froelicher, Neven Fuckar, Matthew Gidden, Helge Goessling, Rune Grand Graversen, Silvio Gualdi, Jose Manuel Gutiérrez, Tatiana Ilyina, Daniela Jacob, Chris Jones, Martin Juckes, Elizabeth Kendon, Erik Kjellström, Reto Knutti, Jason A. Lowe, Matthew Mizielinski, Paola Nassisi, Michael Obersteiner, Pierre Regnier, Romain Roehrig, David Salas y Melia, Carl-Friedrich Schleussner, Michael Schulz, Enrico Scoccimarro, Laurent Terray, Hannes Thiemann, Richard Wood, Shuting Yang, and Sönke Zaehle
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-453, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-453, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
We propose a number of priority areas for the international climate research community to address over the coming ~6 years (i.e. to 2030). Advances in these areas will increase our understanding of past and future Earth system change, including the societal and environmental impacts of this change, as well as deliver significantly improved scientific support to international climate policy, such as the 7th IPCC Assessment Report and the UNFCCC Global Stocktake under the Paris Climate Agreement.
Karl E. Taylor
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 415–430, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-415-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-415-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Remapping gridded data in a way that preserves the conservative properties of the climate system can be essential in coupling model components and for accurate assessment of the system’s energy and mass constituents. Remapping packages capable of handling a wide variety of grids can, for some common grids, calculate remapping weights that are somewhat inaccurate. Correcting for these errors, guidelines are provided to ensure conservation when the weights are used in practice.
Jiwoo Lee, Peter J. Gleckler, Min-Seop Ahn, Ana Ordonez, Paul A. Ullrich, Kenneth R. Sperber, Karl E. Taylor, Yann Y. Planton, Eric Guilyardi, Paul Durack, Celine Bonfils, Mark D. Zelinka, Li-Wei Chao, Bo Dong, Charles Doutriaux, Chengzhu Zhang, Tom Vo, Jason Boutte, Michael F. Wehner, Angeline G. Pendergrass, Daehyun Kim, Zeyu Xue, Andrew T. Wittenberg, and John Krasting
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-2720, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-2720, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
We introduce an open-source software, the PCMDI Metrics Package (PMP), developed for a comprehensive comparison of Earth System Models (ESMs) with real-world observations. Using diverse metrics evaluating climatology, variability, and extremes simulated in thousands of simulations from the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP), PMP aids in benchmarking model improvements across generations. PMP also enables efficient tracking of performance evolutions during ESM developments.
Benjamin Mark Sanderson, Ben B. B. Booth, John Dunne, Veronika Eyring, Rosie A. Fisher, Pierre Friedlingstein, Matthew J. Gidden, Tomohiro Hajima, Chris D. Jones, Colin Jones, Andrew King, Charles D. Koven, David M. Lawrence, Jason Lowe, Nadine Mengis, Glen P. Peters, Joeri Rogelj, Chris Smith, Abigail C. Snyder, Isla R. Simpson, Abigail L. S. Swann, Claudia Tebaldi, Tatiana Ilyina, Carl-Friedrich Schleussner, Roland Seferian, Bjørn Hallvard Samset, Detlef van Vuuren, and Sönke Zaehle
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-2127, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-2127, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
We discuss how, in order to provide more relevant guidance for climate policy, coordinated climate experiments should adopt a greater focus on simulations where Earth System Models are provided with carbon emissions from fossil fuels together with land use change instructions, rather than past approaches which have largely focussed on experiments with prescribed atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations. We highlight the technical feasibility of achieving these simulations in coming years.
Arndt Kaps, Axel Lauer, Rémi Kazeroni, Martin Stengel, and Veronika Eyring
Earth Syst. Sci. Data Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-2023-424, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-2023-424, 2023
Preprint under review for ESSD
Short summary
Short summary
CCClim displays observations of clouds in terms of cloud classes that have been in use for a long time. CCClim is a machine-learning-powered product based on multiple existing observational products from different satellites. We show that the cloud classes in CCClim are physically meaningful and can be used to study cloud characteristics in more detail. The goal of this is to make real-world clouds more easily understandable to eventually improve the simulation of clouds in climate models.
Soufiane Karmouche, Evgenia Galytska, Gerald A. Meehl, Jakob Runge, Katja Weigel, and Veronika Eyring
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-1861, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-1861, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
This study explores Atlantic-Pacific interactions and their response to external factors. Using advanced causal analysis, we analyzed climate data from 1950–2014, revealing a shift from a Pacific- to an Atlantic-driven regime. The contrasting impacts between El Niño and Tropical North Atlantic temperatures were highlighted, along with different pathways connecting the two oceans. These findings have the potential to enhance understanding of the climate system and guide model improvements.
Mark D. Zelinka, Christopher J. Smith, Yi Qin, and Karl E. Taylor
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 23, 8879–8898, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-8879-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-8879-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
The primary uncertainty in how strongly Earth's climate has been perturbed by human activities comes from the unknown radiative impact of aerosol changes. Accurately quantifying these forcings – and their sub-components – in climate models is crucial for understanding the past and future simulated climate. In this study we describe biases in previously published estimates of aerosol radiative forcing in climate models and provide corrected estimates along with code for users to compute them.
Min-Seop Ahn, Paul A. Ullrich, Peter J. Gleckler, Jiwoo Lee, Ana C. Ordonez, and Angeline G. Pendergrass
Geosci. Model Dev., 16, 3927–3951, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-3927-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-3927-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
We introduce a framework for regional-scale evaluation of simulated precipitation distributions with 62 climate reference regions and 10 metrics and apply it to evaluate CMIP5 and CMIP6 models against multiple satellite-based precipitation products. The common model biases identified in this study are mainly associated with the overestimated light precipitation and underestimated heavy precipitation. These biases persist from earlier-generation models and have been slightly improved in CMIP6.
Soufiane Karmouche, Evgenia Galytska, Jakob Runge, Gerald A. Meehl, Adam S. Phillips, Katja Weigel, and Veronika Eyring
Earth Syst. Dynam., 14, 309–344, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-14-309-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-14-309-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
This study uses a causal discovery method to evaluate the ability of climate models to represent the interactions between the Atlantic multidecadal variability (AMV) and the Pacific decadal variability (PDV). The approach and findings in this study present a powerful methodology that can be applied to a number of environment-related topics, offering tremendous insights to improve the understanding of the complex Earth system and the state of the art of climate modeling.
Manuel Schlund, Birgit Hassler, Axel Lauer, Bouwe Andela, Patrick Jöckel, Rémi Kazeroni, Saskia Loosveldt Tomas, Brian Medeiros, Valeriu Predoi, Stéphane Sénési, Jérôme Servonnat, Tobias Stacke, Javier Vegas-Regidor, Klaus Zimmermann, and Veronika Eyring
Geosci. Model Dev., 16, 315–333, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-315-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-315-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
The Earth System Model Evaluation Tool (ESMValTool) is a community diagnostics and performance metrics tool for routine evaluation of Earth system models. Originally, ESMValTool was designed to process reformatted output provided by large model intercomparison projects like the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP). Here, we describe a new extension of ESMValTool that allows for reading and processing native climate model output, i.e., data that have not been reformatted before.
M. L. Marszalek, B. Le Saux, P.-P. Mathieu, A. Nowakowski, and D. Springer
Int. Arch. Photogramm. Remote Sens. Spatial Inf. Sci., XLIII-B3-2022, 1327–1333, https://doi.org/10.5194/isprs-archives-XLIII-B3-2022-1327-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/isprs-archives-XLIII-B3-2022-1327-2022, 2022
Trevor J. McDougall, Paul M. Barker, Ryan M. Holmes, Rich Pawlowicz, Stephen M. Griffies, and Paul J. Durack
Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 6445–6466, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-6445-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-6445-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
We show that the way that the air–sea heat flux is treated in ocean models means that the model's temperature variable should be interpreted as being Conservative Temperature, irrespective of whether the equation of state used in an ocean model is EOS-80 or TEOS-10.
Joaquín Muñoz-Sabater, Emanuel Dutra, Anna Agustí-Panareda, Clément Albergel, Gabriele Arduini, Gianpaolo Balsamo, Souhail Boussetta, Margarita Choulga, Shaun Harrigan, Hans Hersbach, Brecht Martens, Diego G. Miralles, María Piles, Nemesio J. Rodríguez-Fernández, Ervin Zsoter, Carlo Buontempo, and Jean-Noël Thépaut
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 13, 4349–4383, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-13-4349-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-13-4349-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
The creation of ERA5-Land responds to a growing number of applications requiring global land datasets at a resolution higher than traditionally reached. ERA5-Land provides operational, global, and hourly key variables of the water and energy cycles over land surfaces, at 9 km resolution, from 1981 until the present. This work provides evidence of an overall improvement of the water cycle compared to previous reanalyses, whereas the energy cycle variables perform as well as those of ERA5.
D. Spiller, L. Ansalone, S. Amici, A. Piscini, and P. P. Mathieu
Int. Arch. Photogramm. Remote Sens. Spatial Inf. Sci., XLIII-B3-2021, 215–222, https://doi.org/10.5194/isprs-archives-XLIII-B3-2021-215-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/isprs-archives-XLIII-B3-2021-215-2021, 2021
Kristopher M. Bedka, Amin R. Nehrir, Michael Kavaya, Rory Barton-Grimley, Mark Beaubien, Brian Carroll, James Collins, John Cooney, G. David Emmitt, Steven Greco, Susan Kooi, Tsengdar Lee, Zhaoyan Liu, Sharon Rodier, and Gail Skofronick-Jackson
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 14, 4305–4334, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-14-4305-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-14-4305-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
This paper demonstrates the Doppler Aerosol WiNd (DAWN) lidar and High Altitude Lidar Observatory (HALO) measurement capabilities across a range of atmospheric conditions, compares DAWN and HALO measurements with Aeolus satellite Doppler wind lidar to gain an initial perspective of Aeolus performance, and discusses how atmospheric dynamic processes can be resolved and better understood through simultaneous observations of wind, water vapour, and aerosol profile observations.
Katja Weigel, Lisa Bock, Bettina K. Gier, Axel Lauer, Mattia Righi, Manuel Schlund, Kemisola Adeniyi, Bouwe Andela, Enrico Arnone, Peter Berg, Louis-Philippe Caron, Irene Cionni, Susanna Corti, Niels Drost, Alasdair Hunter, Llorenç Lledó, Christian Wilhelm Mohr, Aytaç Paçal, Núria Pérez-Zanón, Valeriu Predoi, Marit Sandstad, Jana Sillmann, Andreas Sterl, Javier Vegas-Regidor, Jost von Hardenberg, and Veronika Eyring
Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 3159–3184, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-3159-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-3159-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
This work presents new diagnostics for the Earth System Model Evaluation Tool (ESMValTool) v2.0 on the hydrological cycle, extreme events, impact assessment, regional evaluations, and ensemble member selection. The ESMValTool v2.0 diagnostics are developed by a large community of scientists aiming to facilitate the evaluation and comparison of Earth system models (ESMs) with a focus on the ESMs participating in the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP).
James Keeble, Birgit Hassler, Antara Banerjee, Ramiro Checa-Garcia, Gabriel Chiodo, Sean Davis, Veronika Eyring, Paul T. Griffiths, Olaf Morgenstern, Peer Nowack, Guang Zeng, Jiankai Zhang, Greg Bodeker, Susannah Burrows, Philip Cameron-Smith, David Cugnet, Christopher Danek, Makoto Deushi, Larry W. Horowitz, Anne Kubin, Lijuan Li, Gerrit Lohmann, Martine Michou, Michael J. Mills, Pierre Nabat, Dirk Olivié, Sungsu Park, Øyvind Seland, Jens Stoll, Karl-Hermann Wieners, and Tongwen Wu
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 5015–5061, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-5015-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-5015-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
Stratospheric ozone and water vapour are key components of the Earth system; changes to both have important impacts on global and regional climate. We evaluate changes to these species from 1850 to 2100 in the new generation of CMIP6 models. There is good agreement between the multi-model mean and observations, although there is substantial variation between the individual models. The future evolution of both ozone and water vapour is strongly dependent on the assumed future emissions scenario.
Claudia Tebaldi, Kevin Debeire, Veronika Eyring, Erich Fischer, John Fyfe, Pierre Friedlingstein, Reto Knutti, Jason Lowe, Brian O'Neill, Benjamin Sanderson, Detlef van Vuuren, Keywan Riahi, Malte Meinshausen, Zebedee Nicholls, Katarzyna B. Tokarska, George Hurtt, Elmar Kriegler, Jean-Francois Lamarque, Gerald Meehl, Richard Moss, Susanne E. Bauer, Olivier Boucher, Victor Brovkin, Young-Hwa Byun, Martin Dix, Silvio Gualdi, Huan Guo, Jasmin G. John, Slava Kharin, YoungHo Kim, Tsuyoshi Koshiro, Libin Ma, Dirk Olivié, Swapna Panickal, Fangli Qiao, Xinyao Rong, Nan Rosenbloom, Martin Schupfner, Roland Séférian, Alistair Sellar, Tido Semmler, Xiaoying Shi, Zhenya Song, Christian Steger, Ronald Stouffer, Neil Swart, Kaoru Tachiiri, Qi Tang, Hiroaki Tatebe, Aurore Voldoire, Evgeny Volodin, Klaus Wyser, Xiaoge Xin, Shuting Yang, Yongqiang Yu, and Tilo Ziehn
Earth Syst. Dynam., 12, 253–293, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-12-253-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-12-253-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
We present an overview of CMIP6 ScenarioMIP outcomes from up to 38 participating ESMs according to the new SSP-based scenarios. Average temperature and precipitation projections according to a wide range of forcings, spanning a wider range than the CMIP5 projections, are documented as global averages and geographic patterns. Times of crossing various warming levels are computed, together with benefits of mitigation for selected pairs of scenarios. Comparisons with CMIP5 are also discussed.
Ruth Petrie, Sébastien Denvil, Sasha Ames, Guillaume Levavasseur, Sandro Fiore, Chris Allen, Fabrizio Antonio, Katharina Berger, Pierre-Antoine Bretonnière, Luca Cinquini, Eli Dart, Prashanth Dwarakanath, Kelsey Druken, Ben Evans, Laurent Franchistéguy, Sébastien Gardoll, Eric Gerbier, Mark Greenslade, David Hassell, Alan Iwi, Martin Juckes, Stephan Kindermann, Lukasz Lacinski, Maria Mirto, Atef Ben Nasser, Paola Nassisi, Eric Nienhouse, Sergey Nikonov, Alessandra Nuzzo, Clare Richards, Syazwan Ridzwan, Michel Rixen, Kim Serradell, Kate Snow, Ag Stephens, Martina Stockhause, Hans Vahlenkamp, and Rick Wagner
Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 629–644, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-629-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-629-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
This paper describes the infrastructure that is used to distribute Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6) data around the world for analysis by the climate research community. It is expected that there will be ~20 PB (petabytes) of data available for analysis. The operations team performed a series of preparation "data challenges" to ensure all components of the infrastructure were operational for when the data became available for timely data distribution and subsequent analysis.
Manuel Schlund, Axel Lauer, Pierre Gentine, Steven C. Sherwood, and Veronika Eyring
Earth Syst. Dynam., 11, 1233–1258, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-11-1233-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-11-1233-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
As an important measure of climate change, the Equilibrium Climate Sensitivity (ECS) describes the change in surface temperature after a doubling of the atmospheric CO2 concentration. Climate models from the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP) show a wide range in ECS. Emergent constraints are a technique to reduce uncertainties in ECS with observational data. Emergent constraints developed with data from CMIP phase 5 show reduced skill and higher ECS ranges when applied to CMIP6 data.
Bettina K. Gier, Michael Buchwitz, Maximilian Reuter, Peter M. Cox, Pierre Friedlingstein, and Veronika Eyring
Biogeosciences, 17, 6115–6144, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-17-6115-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-17-6115-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
Models from Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP) phases 5 and 6 are compared to a satellite data product of column-averaged CO2 mole fractions (XCO2). The previously believed discrepancy of the negative trend in seasonal cycle amplitude in the satellite product, which is not seen in in situ data nor in the models, is attributed to a sampling characteristic. Furthermore, CMIP6 models are shown to have made progress in reproducing the observed XCO2 time series compared to CMIP5.
Landon A. Rieger, Jason N. S. Cole, John C. Fyfe, Stephen Po-Chedley, Philip J. Cameron-Smith, Paul J. Durack, Nathan P. Gillett, and Qi Tang
Geosci. Model Dev., 13, 4831–4843, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-4831-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-4831-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
Recently, the stratospheric aerosol forcing dataset used as an input to the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project phase 6 was updated. This work explores the impact of those changes on the modelled historical climates in the CanESM5 and EAMv1 models. Temperature differences in the stratosphere shortly after the Pinatubo eruption are found to be significant, but surface temperatures and precipitation do not show a significant change.
Axel Lauer, Veronika Eyring, Omar Bellprat, Lisa Bock, Bettina K. Gier, Alasdair Hunter, Ruth Lorenz, Núria Pérez-Zanón, Mattia Righi, Manuel Schlund, Daniel Senftleben, Katja Weigel, and Sabrina Zechlau
Geosci. Model Dev., 13, 4205–4228, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-4205-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-4205-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
The Earth System Model Evaluation Tool is a community software tool designed for evaluation and analysis of climate models. New features of version 2.0 include analysis scripts for important large-scale features in climate models, diagnostics for extreme events, regional model and impact evaluation. In this paper, newly implemented climate metrics, emergent constraints for climate-relevant feedbacks and diagnostics for future model projections are described and illustrated with examples.
Veronika Eyring, Lisa Bock, Axel Lauer, Mattia Righi, Manuel Schlund, Bouwe Andela, Enrico Arnone, Omar Bellprat, Björn Brötz, Louis-Philippe Caron, Nuno Carvalhais, Irene Cionni, Nicola Cortesi, Bas Crezee, Edouard L. Davin, Paolo Davini, Kevin Debeire, Lee de Mora, Clara Deser, David Docquier, Paul Earnshaw, Carsten Ehbrecht, Bettina K. Gier, Nube Gonzalez-Reviriego, Paul Goodman, Stefan Hagemann, Steven Hardiman, Birgit Hassler, Alasdair Hunter, Christopher Kadow, Stephan Kindermann, Sujan Koirala, Nikolay Koldunov, Quentin Lejeune, Valerio Lembo, Tomas Lovato, Valerio Lucarini, François Massonnet, Benjamin Müller, Amarjiit Pandde, Núria Pérez-Zanón, Adam Phillips, Valeriu Predoi, Joellen Russell, Alistair Sellar, Federico Serva, Tobias Stacke, Ranjini Swaminathan, Verónica Torralba, Javier Vegas-Regidor, Jost von Hardenberg, Katja Weigel, and Klaus Zimmermann
Geosci. Model Dev., 13, 3383–3438, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-3383-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-3383-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
The Earth System Model Evaluation Tool (ESMValTool) is a community diagnostics and performance metrics tool designed to improve comprehensive and routine evaluation of earth system models (ESMs) participating in the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP). It has undergone rapid development since the first release in 2016 and is now a well-tested tool that provides end-to-end provenance tracking to ensure reproducibility.
Charlotte Pascoe, Bryan N. Lawrence, Eric Guilyardi, Martin Juckes, and Karl E. Taylor
Geosci. Model Dev., 13, 2149–2167, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-2149-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-2149-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
We present a methodology for documenting numerical experiments in the context of an information sharing ecosystem which allows the weather, climate, and earth system modelling community to accurately document and share information about their modelling workflow. We describe how through iteration with a range of stakeholders, we rationalized multiple sources of information and improved the clarity of experimental definitions for the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6).
Mattia Righi, Bouwe Andela, Veronika Eyring, Axel Lauer, Valeriu Predoi, Manuel Schlund, Javier Vegas-Regidor, Lisa Bock, Björn Brötz, Lee de Mora, Faruk Diblen, Laura Dreyer, Niels Drost, Paul Earnshaw, Birgit Hassler, Nikolay Koldunov, Bill Little, Saskia Loosveldt Tomas, and Klaus Zimmermann
Geosci. Model Dev., 13, 1179–1199, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-1179-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-1179-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
This paper describes the second major release of ESMValTool, a community diagnostic and performance metrics tool for the evaluation of Earth system models. This new version features a brand new design, with an improved interface and a revised preprocessor. It takes advantage of state-of-the-art computational libraries and methods to deploy efficient and user-friendly data processing, improving the performance over its predecessor by more than a factor of 30.
Freek Liefhebber, Sarah Lammens, Paul W. G. Brussee, André Bos, Viju O. John, Frank Rüthrich, Jacobus Onderwaater, Michael G. Grant, and Jörg Schulz
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 13, 1167–1179, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-13-1167-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-13-1167-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
The paper addresses the need for automatic quality control of a whole series of Earth observation (EO) time series extending a period of over 40 years. Such a dataset is valuable and may provide important information about trends related to geo-physical processes. Furthermore, as the dataset is that large, there is a need to completely automate the processes, as otherwise the effort would become impracticable. The result is a system with a high probability of detection and low false alarm rate.
Martin Juckes, Karl E. Taylor, Paul J. Durack, Bryan Lawrence, Matthew S. Mizielinski, Alison Pamment, Jean-Yves Peterschmitt, Michel Rixen, and Stéphane Sénési
Geosci. Model Dev., 13, 201–224, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-201-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-201-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
The data request of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6) defines all the quantities
from CMIP6 simulations that should be archived. The building blocks and structure of the CMIP6 Data Request, which has been constructed to meet these challenges, are described in this paper.
Grégory Cesana, Anthony D. Del Genio, and Hélène Chepfer
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 11, 1745–1764, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-11-1745-2019, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-11-1745-2019, 2019
Short summary
Short summary
Low clouds (cloud top below 3 km) drive most of the uncertainty in future climate projections. Here we create a new dataset, the Cumulus And Stratocumulus CloudSat-CALIPSO Dataset (CASCCAD), which identifies the different types of low clouds – stratocumulus and cumulus – based on their morphology. CASCCAD provides a basis to evaluate climate models and potentially improve our understanding of the cloud response to climate warming, as well as reduce the uncertainty in future climate projection.
James C. Biard and Kenneth E. Kunkel
Adv. Stat. Clim. Meteorol. Oceanogr., 5, 147–160, https://doi.org/10.5194/ascmo-5-147-2019, https://doi.org/10.5194/ascmo-5-147-2019, 2019
Short summary
Short summary
A deep learning convolutional neural network (DL-FRONT) was around 90 % successful in determining the locations of weather fronts over North America when compared against front locations determined manually by forecasters. DL-FRONT detects fronts using maps of air pressure, temperature, humidity, and wind from historical observations or climate models. DL-FRONT makes it possible to do science that was previously impractical because manual front identification would take too much time.
Christoph Heinze, Veronika Eyring, Pierre Friedlingstein, Colin Jones, Yves Balkanski, William Collins, Thierry Fichefet, Shuang Gao, Alex Hall, Detelina Ivanova, Wolfgang Knorr, Reto Knutti, Alexander Löw, Michael Ponater, Martin G. Schultz, Michael Schulz, Pier Siebesma, Joao Teixeira, George Tselioudis, and Martin Vancoppenolle
Earth Syst. Dynam., 10, 379–452, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-10-379-2019, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-10-379-2019, 2019
Short summary
Short summary
Earth system models for producing climate projections under given forcings include additional processes and feedbacks that traditional physical climate models do not consider. We present an overview of climate feedbacks for key Earth system components and discuss the evaluation of these feedbacks. The target group for this article includes generalists with a background in natural sciences and an interest in climate change as well as experts working in interdisciplinary climate research.
Rémy Roca, Lisa V. Alexander, Gerald Potter, Margot Bador, Rômulo Jucá, Steefan Contractor, Michael G. Bosilovich, and Sophie Cloché
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 11, 1017–1035, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-11-1017-2019, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-11-1017-2019, 2019
Short summary
Short summary
This paper presents a database that is a collection of datasets of gridded 1° × 1° daily precipitation estimates from a variety of sources. It includes observations from in situ networks, satellite-based estimations and outputs from atmospheric reanalysis. All the datasets have been formatted in the same way to ease their manipulation. This database aims at facilitating intercomparisons and validation exercises performed by the scientific community.
Sarah Safieddine, Ana Claudia Parracho, Maya George, Filipe Aires, Victor Pellet, Lieven Clarisse, Simon Whitburn, Olivier Lezeaux, Jean-Noel Thepaut, Hans Hersbach, Gabor Radnoti, Frank Goettsche, Maria Martin, Marie Doutriaux Boucher, Dorothee Coppens, Thomas August, and Cathy Clerbaux
Atmos. Meas. Tech. Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-2019-185, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-2019-185, 2019
Preprint withdrawn
Short summary
Short summary
Skin temperature is one of the essential climate variables (ECVs), and is relevant for the current and future understanding of our climate. This work presents a method to retrieve skin temperature from the thermal infrared sounder IASI that provides a global observation of Earth’s surface and atmosphere twice a day. With this method, the first consistent long-term [2007-present] skin temperature record from IASI can be constructed.
O. Danylo, I. Moorthy, T. Sturn, L. See, J.-C. Laso Bayas, D. Domian, D. Fraisl, C. Giovando, B. Girardot, R. Kapur, P.-P. Matthieu, and S. Fritz
ISPRS Ann. Photogramm. Remote Sens. Spatial Inf. Sci., IV-4, 27–32, https://doi.org/10.5194/isprs-annals-IV-4-27-2018, https://doi.org/10.5194/isprs-annals-IV-4-27-2018, 2018
Venkatramani Balaji, Karl E. Taylor, Martin Juckes, Bryan N. Lawrence, Paul J. Durack, Michael Lautenschlager, Chris Blanton, Luca Cinquini, Sébastien Denvil, Mark Elkington, Francesca Guglielmo, Eric Guilyardi, David Hassell, Slava Kharin, Stefan Kindermann, Sergey Nikonov, Aparna Radhakrishnan, Martina Stockhause, Tobias Weigel, and Dean Williams
Geosci. Model Dev., 11, 3659–3680, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-3659-2018, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-3659-2018, 2018
Short summary
Short summary
We present recommendations for the global data infrastructure needed to support CMIP scientific design and its future growth and evolution. We follow a dataset-centric design less prone to systemic failure. Scientific publication in the digital age is evolving to make data a primary scientific output, alongside articles. We design toward that future scientific data ecosystem, informed by the need for reproducibility, data provenance, future data technologies, and measures of costs and benefits.
Fanny Jeanneret, Giovanni Martucci, Simon Pinnock, and Alexis Berne
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 11, 4153–4170, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-11-4153-2018, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-11-4153-2018, 2018
Short summary
Short summary
Above mountainous regions, satellites may have difficulty in discriminating snow from clouds: this study proposes a new method that combines different ground-based measurements to assess the sky cloudiness with high temporal resolution. The method's output is used as input to a model capable of identifying false satellite cloud detections. Results show that 62 ± 13 % of these false detections can be identified by the model when applied to the AVHRR-PM and MODIS Aqua data sets of the Cloud_cci.
Christine A. Shields, Jonathan J. Rutz, Lai-Yung Leung, F. Martin Ralph, Michael Wehner, Brian Kawzenuk, Juan M. Lora, Elizabeth McClenny, Tashiana Osborne, Ashley E. Payne, Paul Ullrich, Alexander Gershunov, Naomi Goldenson, Bin Guan, Yun Qian, Alexandre M. Ramos, Chandan Sarangi, Scott Sellars, Irina Gorodetskaya, Karthik Kashinath, Vitaliy Kurlin, Kelly Mahoney, Grzegorz Muszynski, Roger Pierce, Aneesh C. Subramanian, Ricardo Tome, Duane Waliser, Daniel Walton, Gary Wick, Anna Wilson, David Lavers, Prabhat, Allison Collow, Harinarayan Krishnan, Gudrun Magnusdottir, and Phu Nguyen
Geosci. Model Dev., 11, 2455–2474, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-2455-2018, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-2455-2018, 2018
Short summary
Short summary
ARTMIP (Atmospheric River Tracking Method Intercomparison Project) is a community effort with the explicit goal of understanding the uncertainties, and the implications of those uncertainties, in atmospheric river science solely due to detection algorithm. ARTMIP strives to quantify these differences and provide guidance on appropriate algorithmic choices for the science question posed. Project goals, experimental design, and preliminary results are provided.
Marc Schröder, Maarit Lockhoff, Frank Fell, John Forsythe, Tim Trent, Ralf Bennartz, Eva Borbas, Michael G. Bosilovich, Elisa Castelli, Hans Hersbach, Misako Kachi, Shinya Kobayashi, E. Robert Kursinski, Diego Loyola, Carl Mears, Rene Preusker, William B. Rossow, and Suranjana Saha
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 10, 1093–1117, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-10-1093-2018, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-10-1093-2018, 2018
Short summary
Short summary
This publication presents results achieved within the GEWEX Water Vapor Assessment (G-VAP). An overview of available water vapour data records based on satellite observations and reanalysis is given. If a minimum temporal coverage of 10 years is applied, 22 data records remain. These form the G-VAP data archive, which contains total column water vapour, specific humidity profiles and temperature profiles. The G-VAP data archive is designed to ease intercomparison and climate model evaluation.
Marjolaine Chiriaco, Jean-Charles Dupont, Sophie Bastin, Jordi Badosa, Julio Lopez, Martial Haeffelin, Helene Chepfer, and Rodrigo Guzman
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 10, 919–940, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-10-919-2018, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-10-919-2018, 2018
Short summary
Short summary
A scientific approach is presented to aggregate and harmonize a set of 60 geophysical variables at hourly scale over a decade, and to allow multiannual and multi-variable studies combining atmospheric dynamics and thermodynamics, radiation, clouds and aerosols from ground-based observations.
Klaus-Dirk Gottschaldt, Hans Schlager, Robert Baumann, Duy Sinh Cai, Veronika Eyring, Phoebe Graf, Volker Grewe, Patrick Jöckel, Tina Jurkat-Witschas, Christiane Voigt, Andreas Zahn, and Helmut Ziereis
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 18, 5655–5675, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-5655-2018, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-5655-2018, 2018
Short summary
Short summary
This study places aircraft trace gas measurements from within the Asian summer monsoon anticyclone into the context of regional, intra- and interannual variability. We find that the processes reflected in the measurements are present throughout multiple simulated monsoon seasons. Dynamical instabilities, photochemical ozone production, lightning and entrainments from the lower troposphere and from the tropopause region determine the distinct composition of the anticyclone and its outflow.
Axel Lauer, Colin Jones, Veronika Eyring, Martin Evaldsson, Stefan Hagemann, Jarmo Mäkelä, Gill Martin, Romain Roehrig, and Shiyu Wang
Earth Syst. Dynam., 9, 33–67, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-9-33-2018, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-9-33-2018, 2018
David Hassell, Jonathan Gregory, Jon Blower, Bryan N. Lawrence, and Karl E. Taylor
Geosci. Model Dev., 10, 4619–4646, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-10-4619-2017, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-10-4619-2017, 2017
Short summary
Short summary
We present a formal data model for version 1.6 of the CF (Climate and Forecast) metadata conventions that provide a description of the physical meaning of geoscientific data and their spatial and temporal properties. We describe the CF conventions and how they lead to our CF data model, and compare it other data models for storing data and metadata. We present cf-python version 2.1: a software implementation of the CF data model capable of manipulating any CF-compliant dataset.
Peter W. Thorne, Fabio Madonna, Joerg Schulz, Tim Oakley, Bruce Ingleby, Marco Rosoldi, Emanuele Tramutola, Antti Arola, Matthias Buschmann, Anna C. Mikalsen, Richard Davy, Corinne Voces, Karin Kreher, Martine De Maziere, and Gelsomina Pappalardo
Geosci. Instrum. Method. Data Syst., 6, 453–472, https://doi.org/10.5194/gi-6-453-2017, https://doi.org/10.5194/gi-6-453-2017, 2017
Short summary
Short summary
The term system-of-systems with respect to observational capabilities is frequently used, but what does it mean and how can it be assessed? Here, we define one possible interpretation of a system-of-systems architecture that is based upon demonstrable aspects of observing capabilities. We develop a set of assessment strands and then apply these to a set of atmospheric observational networks to decide which observations may be suitable for characterising satellite platforms in future work.
Sean M. Davis, Michaela I. Hegglin, Masatomo Fujiwara, Rossana Dragani, Yayoi Harada, Chiaki Kobayashi, Craig Long, Gloria L. Manney, Eric R. Nash, Gerald L. Potter, Susann Tegtmeier, Tao Wang, Krzysztof Wargan, and Jonathon S. Wright
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 17, 12743–12778, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-17-12743-2017, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-17-12743-2017, 2017
Short summary
Short summary
Ozone and water vapor in the stratosphere are important gases that affect surface climate and absorb incoming solar ultraviolet radiation. These gases are represented in reanalyses, which create a complete picture of the state of Earth's atmosphere using limited observations. We evaluate reanalysis water vapor and ozone fidelity by intercomparing them, and comparing them to independent observations. Generally reanalyses do a good job at representing ozone, but have problems with water vapor.
Klaus-D. Gottschaldt, Hans Schlager, Robert Baumann, Heiko Bozem, Veronika Eyring, Peter Hoor, Patrick Jöckel, Tina Jurkat, Christiane Voigt, Andreas Zahn, and Helmut Ziereis
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 17, 6091–6111, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-17-6091-2017, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-17-6091-2017, 2017
Short summary
Short summary
We present upper-tropospheric trace gas measurements in the Asian summer monsoon anticyclone, obtained with the HALO research aircraft in September 2012. The anticyclone is one of the largest atmospheric features on Earth, but many aspects of it are not well understood. With the help of model simulations we find that entrainments from the tropopause region and the lower troposphere, combined with photochemistry and dynamical instabilities, can explain the observations.
Thomas Kaminski and Pierre-Philippe Mathieu
Biogeosciences, 14, 2343–2357, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-14-2343-2017, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-14-2343-2017, 2017
Short summary
Short summary
This paper provides the formalism and examples of how observation operators can be used, in combination with data assimilation or retrieval techniques, to better ingest satellite products in a manner consistent with the dynamics of the Earth system expressed by models.
William J. Collins, Jean-François Lamarque, Michael Schulz, Olivier Boucher, Veronika Eyring, Michaela I. Hegglin, Amanda Maycock, Gunnar Myhre, Michael Prather, Drew Shindell, and Steven J. Smith
Geosci. Model Dev., 10, 585–607, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-10-585-2017, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-10-585-2017, 2017
Short summary
Short summary
We have designed a set of climate model experiments called the Aerosol Chemistry Model Intercomparison Project (AerChemMIP). These are designed to quantify the climate and air quality impacts of aerosols and chemically reactive gases in the climate models that are used to simulate past and future climate. We hope that many climate modelling centres will choose to run these experiments to help understand the contribution of aerosols and chemistry to climate change.
Mark J. Webb, Timothy Andrews, Alejandro Bodas-Salcedo, Sandrine Bony, Christopher S. Bretherton, Robin Chadwick, Hélène Chepfer, Hervé Douville, Peter Good, Jennifer E. Kay, Stephen A. Klein, Roger Marchand, Brian Medeiros, A. Pier Siebesma, Christopher B. Skinner, Bjorn Stevens, George Tselioudis, Yoko Tsushima, and Masahiro Watanabe
Geosci. Model Dev., 10, 359–384, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-10-359-2017, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-10-359-2017, 2017
Short summary
Short summary
The Cloud Feedback Model Intercomparison Project (CFMIP) aims to improve understanding of cloud-climate feedback mechanisms and evaluation of cloud processes and cloud feedbacks in climate models. CFMIP also aims to improve understanding of circulation, regional-scale precipitation and non-linear changes. CFMIP is contributing to the 6th phase of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP6) by coordinating a hierarchy of targeted experiments with cloud-related model outputs.
William J. Gutowski Jr., Filippo Giorgi, Bertrand Timbal, Anne Frigon, Daniela Jacob, Hyun-Suk Kang, Krishnan Raghavan, Boram Lee, Christopher Lennard, Grigory Nikulin, Eleanor O'Rourke, Michel Rixen, Silvina Solman, Tannecia Stephenson, and Fredolin Tangang
Geosci. Model Dev., 9, 4087–4095, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-4087-2016, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-4087-2016, 2016
Short summary
Short summary
The Coordinated Regional Downscaling Experiment (CORDEX) is a diagnostic MIP in CMIP6. CORDEX builds on a foundation of previous downscaling intercomparison projects to provide a common framework for downscaling activities around the world. The CORDEX Regional Challenges provide a focus for downscaling research and a basis for making use of CMIP6 global output to produce downscaled projected changes in regional climates, and assess sources of uncertainties in the projections.
Veronika Eyring, Peter J. Gleckler, Christoph Heinze, Ronald J. Stouffer, Karl E. Taylor, V. Balaji, Eric Guilyardi, Sylvie Joussaume, Stephan Kindermann, Bryan N. Lawrence, Gerald A. Meehl, Mattia Righi, and Dean N. Williams
Earth Syst. Dynam., 7, 813–830, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-7-813-2016, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-7-813-2016, 2016
Short summary
Short summary
We argue that the CMIP community has reached a critical juncture at which many baseline aspects of model evaluation need to be performed much more efficiently to enable a systematic and rapid performance assessment of the large number of models participating in CMIP, and we announce our intention to implement such a system for CMIP6. At the same time, continuous scientific research is required to develop innovative metrics and diagnostics that help narrowing the spread in climate projections.
George J. Boer, Douglas M. Smith, Christophe Cassou, Francisco Doblas-Reyes, Gokhan Danabasoglu, Ben Kirtman, Yochanan Kushnir, Masahide Kimoto, Gerald A. Meehl, Rym Msadek, Wolfgang A. Mueller, Karl E. Taylor, Francis Zwiers, Michel Rixen, Yohan Ruprich-Robert, and Rosie Eade
Geosci. Model Dev., 9, 3751–3777, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-3751-2016, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-3751-2016, 2016
Short summary
Short summary
The Decadal Climate Prediction Project (DCPP) investigates our ability to skilfully predict climate variations from a year to a decade ahead by means of a series of retrospective forecasts. Quasi-real-time forecasts are also produced for potential users. In addition, the DCPP investigates how perturbations such as volcanoes affect forecasts and, more broadly, what new information can be learned about the mechanisms governing climate variations by means of case studies of past climate behaviour.
Brian C. O'Neill, Claudia Tebaldi, Detlef P. van Vuuren, Veronika Eyring, Pierre Friedlingstein, George Hurtt, Reto Knutti, Elmar Kriegler, Jean-Francois Lamarque, Jason Lowe, Gerald A. Meehl, Richard Moss, Keywan Riahi, and Benjamin M. Sanderson
Geosci. Model Dev., 9, 3461–3482, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-3461-2016, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-3461-2016, 2016
Short summary
Short summary
The Scenario Model Intercomparison Project (ScenarioMIP) will provide multi-model climate projections based on alternative scenarios of future emissions and land use changes produced with integrated assessment models. The design consists of eight alternative 21st century scenarios plus one large initial condition ensemble and a set of long-term extensions. Climate model projections will facilitate integrated studies of climate change as well as address targeted scientific questions.
Alexander Loew, Ralf Bennartz, Frank Fell, Alessio Lattanzio, Marie Doutriaux-Boucher, and Jörg Schulz
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 8, 425–438, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-8-425-2016, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-8-425-2016, 2016
Short summary
Short summary
The paper introduces a novel database of global potential surface albedo validation sites which are very well characterized in terms of their spatial heterogeneity. The database might be usefull for the validation and longterm monitoring of satellite data products and validation of satellite derived geophysical datasets.
Stephen M. Griffies, Gokhan Danabasoglu, Paul J. Durack, Alistair J. Adcroft, V. Balaji, Claus W. Böning, Eric P. Chassignet, Enrique Curchitser, Julie Deshayes, Helge Drange, Baylor Fox-Kemper, Peter J. Gleckler, Jonathan M. Gregory, Helmuth Haak, Robert W. Hallberg, Patrick Heimbach, Helene T. Hewitt, David M. Holland, Tatiana Ilyina, Johann H. Jungclaus, Yoshiki Komuro, John P. Krasting, William G. Large, Simon J. Marsland, Simona Masina, Trevor J. McDougall, A. J. George Nurser, James C. Orr, Anna Pirani, Fangli Qiao, Ronald J. Stouffer, Karl E. Taylor, Anne Marie Treguier, Hiroyuki Tsujino, Petteri Uotila, Maria Valdivieso, Qiang Wang, Michael Winton, and Stephen G. Yeager
Geosci. Model Dev., 9, 3231–3296, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-3231-2016, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-3231-2016, 2016
Short summary
Short summary
The Ocean Model Intercomparison Project (OMIP) aims to provide a framework for evaluating, understanding, and improving the ocean and sea-ice components of global climate and earth system models contributing to the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6). This document defines OMIP and details a protocol both for simulating global ocean/sea-ice models and for analysing their output.
Dorothee C. E. Bakker, Benjamin Pfeil, Camilla S. Landa, Nicolas Metzl, Kevin M. O'Brien, Are Olsen, Karl Smith, Cathy Cosca, Sumiko Harasawa, Stephen D. Jones, Shin-ichiro Nakaoka, Yukihiro Nojiri, Ute Schuster, Tobias Steinhoff, Colm Sweeney, Taro Takahashi, Bronte Tilbrook, Chisato Wada, Rik Wanninkhof, Simone R. Alin, Carlos F. Balestrini, Leticia Barbero, Nicholas R. Bates, Alejandro A. Bianchi, Frédéric Bonou, Jacqueline Boutin, Yann Bozec, Eugene F. Burger, Wei-Jun Cai, Robert D. Castle, Liqi Chen, Melissa Chierici, Kim Currie, Wiley Evans, Charles Featherstone, Richard A. Feely, Agneta Fransson, Catherine Goyet, Naomi Greenwood, Luke Gregor, Steven Hankin, Nick J. Hardman-Mountford, Jérôme Harlay, Judith Hauck, Mario Hoppema, Matthew P. Humphreys, Christopher W. Hunt, Betty Huss, J. Severino P. Ibánhez, Truls Johannessen, Ralph Keeling, Vassilis Kitidis, Arne Körtzinger, Alex Kozyr, Evangelia Krasakopoulou, Akira Kuwata, Peter Landschützer, Siv K. Lauvset, Nathalie Lefèvre, Claire Lo Monaco, Ansley Manke, Jeremy T. Mathis, Liliane Merlivat, Frank J. Millero, Pedro M. S. Monteiro, David R. Munro, Akihiko Murata, Timothy Newberger, Abdirahman M. Omar, Tsuneo Ono, Kristina Paterson, David Pearce, Denis Pierrot, Lisa L. Robbins, Shu Saito, Joe Salisbury, Reiner Schlitzer, Bernd Schneider, Roland Schweitzer, Rainer Sieger, Ingunn Skjelvan, Kevin F. Sullivan, Stewart C. Sutherland, Adrienne J. Sutton, Kazuaki Tadokoro, Maciej Telszewski, Matthias Tuma, Steven M. A. C. van Heuven, Doug Vandemark, Brian Ward, Andrew J. Watson, and Suqing Xu
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 8, 383–413, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-8-383-2016, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-8-383-2016, 2016
Short summary
Short summary
Version 3 of the Surface Ocean CO2 Atlas (www.socat.info) has 14.5 million CO2 (carbon dioxide) values for the years 1957 to 2014 covering the global oceans and coastal seas. Version 3 is an update to version 2 with a longer record and 44 % more CO2 values. The CO2 measurements have been made on ships, fixed moorings and drifting buoys. SOCAT enables quantification of the ocean carbon sink and ocean acidification, as well as model evaluation, thus informing climate negotiations.
Raquel A. Silva, J. Jason West, Jean-François Lamarque, Drew T. Shindell, William J. Collins, Stig Dalsoren, Greg Faluvegi, Gerd Folberth, Larry W. Horowitz, Tatsuya Nagashima, Vaishali Naik, Steven T. Rumbold, Kengo Sudo, Toshihiko Takemura, Daniel Bergmann, Philip Cameron-Smith, Irene Cionni, Ruth M. Doherty, Veronika Eyring, Beatrice Josse, Ian A. MacKenzie, David Plummer, Mattia Righi, David S. Stevenson, Sarah Strode, Sophie Szopa, and Guang Zengast
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 16, 9847–9862, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-9847-2016, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-9847-2016, 2016
Short summary
Short summary
Using ozone and PM2.5 concentrations from the ACCMIP ensemble of chemistry-climate models for the four Representative Concentration Pathway scenarios (RCPs), together with projections of future population and baseline mortality rates, we quantify the human premature mortality impacts of future ambient air pollution in 2030, 2050 and 2100, relative to 2000 concentrations. We also estimate the global mortality burden of ozone and PM2.5 in 2000 and each future period.
Veronika Eyring, Sandrine Bony, Gerald A. Meehl, Catherine A. Senior, Bjorn Stevens, Ronald J. Stouffer, and Karl E. Taylor
Geosci. Model Dev., 9, 1937–1958, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-1937-2016, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-1937-2016, 2016
Short summary
Short summary
The objective of CMIP is to better understand past, present, and future climate change in a multi-model context. CMIP's increasing importance and scope is a tremendous success story, but the need to address an ever-expanding range of scientific questions arising from more and more research communities has made it necessary to revise the organization of CMIP. In response to these challenges, we have adopted a more federated structure for the sixth phase of CMIP (i.e. CMIP6) and subsequent phases.
Veronika Eyring, Mattia Righi, Axel Lauer, Martin Evaldsson, Sabrina Wenzel, Colin Jones, Alessandro Anav, Oliver Andrews, Irene Cionni, Edouard L. Davin, Clara Deser, Carsten Ehbrecht, Pierre Friedlingstein, Peter Gleckler, Klaus-Dirk Gottschaldt, Stefan Hagemann, Martin Juckes, Stephan Kindermann, John Krasting, Dominik Kunert, Richard Levine, Alexander Loew, Jarmo Mäkelä, Gill Martin, Erik Mason, Adam S. Phillips, Simon Read, Catherine Rio, Romain Roehrig, Daniel Senftleben, Andreas Sterl, Lambertus H. van Ulft, Jeremy Walton, Shiyu Wang, and Keith D. Williams
Geosci. Model Dev., 9, 1747–1802, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-1747-2016, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-1747-2016, 2016
Short summary
Short summary
A community diagnostics and performance metrics tool for the evaluation of Earth system models (ESMs) in CMIP has been developed that allows for routine comparison of single or multiple models, either against predecessor versions or against observations.
S. Rémy, A. Benedetti, A. Bozzo, T. Haiden, L. Jones, M. Razinger, J. Flemming, R. J. Engelen, V. H. Peuch, and J. N. Thepaut
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 15, 12909–12933, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-15-12909-2015, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-15-12909-2015, 2015
Short summary
Short summary
In this paper we report on the feedbacks between dust and boundary layer meteorology during a dust storm over Egypt and Libya in April 2012, using an atmospheric composition forecasting system. Dust was found to act on atmospheric stability, leading to an increase (night) or a decrease (day) in dust production. Horizontal gradients of temperature were modified by the radiative impact of the dust layer, leading to changes in wind patterns at the edge of the storm due to the thermal wind effect.
A. Lattanzio, F. Fell, R. Bennartz, I. F. Trigo, and J. Schulz
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 8, 4561–4571, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-8-4561-2015, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-8-4561-2015, 2015
Short summary
Short summary
EUMETSAT has generated a surface albedo data set climate data record, spanning over more than 2 decades, from measurements acquired by Meteosat First Generation satellites. EUMETSAT coordinated a study for the validation of such a data record. In the validation report, the full set of results, including comparison with in situ measurements and satellites, was presented. A method of increasing the quality of the data set, removing cloud-contaminated pixels, is presented.
M. Righi, V. Eyring, K.-D. Gottschaldt, C. Klinger, F. Frank, P. Jöckel, and I. Cionni
Geosci. Model Dev., 8, 733–768, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-8-733-2015, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-8-733-2015, 2015
V. Naik, A. Voulgarakis, A. M. Fiore, L. W. Horowitz, J.-F. Lamarque, M. Lin, M. J. Prather, P. J. Young, D. Bergmann, P. J. Cameron-Smith, I. Cionni, W. J. Collins, S. B. Dalsøren, R. Doherty, V. Eyring, G. Faluvegi, G. A. Folberth, B. Josse, Y. H. Lee, I. A. MacKenzie, T. Nagashima, T. P. C. van Noije, D. A. Plummer, M. Righi, S. T. Rumbold, R. Skeie, D. T. Shindell, D. S. Stevenson, S. Strode, K. Sudo, S. Szopa, and G. Zeng
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 13, 5277–5298, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-5277-2013, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-5277-2013, 2013
A. Inness, F. Baier, A. Benedetti, I. Bouarar, S. Chabrillat, H. Clark, C. Clerbaux, P. Coheur, R. J. Engelen, Q. Errera, J. Flemming, M. George, C. Granier, J. Hadji-Lazaro, V. Huijnen, D. Hurtmans, L. Jones, J. W. Kaiser, J. Kapsomenakis, K. Lefever, J. Leitão, M. Razinger, A. Richter, M. G. Schultz, A. J. Simmons, M. Suttie, O. Stein, J.-N. Thépaut, V. Thouret, M. Vrekoussis, C. Zerefos, and the MACC team
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 13, 4073–4109, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-4073-2013, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-4073-2013, 2013
M. Schröder, M. Jonas, R. Lindau, J. Schulz, and K. Fennig
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 6, 765–775, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-6-765-2013, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-6-765-2013, 2013
D. S. Stevenson, P. J. Young, V. Naik, J.-F. Lamarque, D. T. Shindell, A. Voulgarakis, R. B. Skeie, S. B. Dalsoren, G. Myhre, T. K. Berntsen, G. A. Folberth, S. T. Rumbold, W. J. Collins, I. A. MacKenzie, R. M. Doherty, G. Zeng, T. P. C. van Noije, A. Strunk, D. Bergmann, P. Cameron-Smith, D. A. Plummer, S. A. Strode, L. Horowitz, Y. H. Lee, S. Szopa, K. Sudo, T. Nagashima, B. Josse, I. Cionni, M. Righi, V. Eyring, A. Conley, K. W. Bowman, O. Wild, and A. Archibald
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 13, 3063–3085, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-3063-2013, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-3063-2013, 2013
J. Gazeaux, C. Clerbaux, M. George, J. Hadji-Lazaro, J. Kuttippurath, P.-F. Coheur, D. Hurtmans, T. Deshler, M. Kovilakam, P. Campbell, V. Guidard, F. Rabier, and J.-N. Thépaut
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 6, 613–620, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-6-613-2013, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-6-613-2013, 2013
A. Voulgarakis, V. Naik, J.-F. Lamarque, D. T. Shindell, P. J. Young, M. J. Prather, O. Wild, R. D. Field, D. Bergmann, P. Cameron-Smith, I. Cionni, W. J. Collins, S. B. Dalsøren, R. M. Doherty, V. Eyring, G. Faluvegi, G. A. Folberth, L. W. Horowitz, B. Josse, I. A. MacKenzie, T. Nagashima, D. A. Plummer, M. Righi, S. T. Rumbold, D. S. Stevenson, S. A. Strode, K. Sudo, S. Szopa, and G. Zeng
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 13, 2563–2587, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-2563-2013, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-2563-2013, 2013
P. J. Young, A. T. Archibald, K. W. Bowman, J.-F. Lamarque, V. Naik, D. S. Stevenson, S. Tilmes, A. Voulgarakis, O. Wild, D. Bergmann, P. Cameron-Smith, I. Cionni, W. J. Collins, S. B. Dalsøren, R. M. Doherty, V. Eyring, G. Faluvegi, L. W. Horowitz, B. Josse, Y. H. Lee, I. A. MacKenzie, T. Nagashima, D. A. Plummer, M. Righi, S. T. Rumbold, R. B. Skeie, D. T. Shindell, S. A. Strode, K. Sudo, S. Szopa, and G. Zeng
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 13, 2063–2090, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-2063-2013, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-2063-2013, 2013
J.-F. Lamarque, D. T. Shindell, B. Josse, P. J. Young, I. Cionni, V. Eyring, D. Bergmann, P. Cameron-Smith, W. J. Collins, R. Doherty, S. Dalsoren, G. Faluvegi, G. Folberth, S. J. Ghan, L. W. Horowitz, Y. H. Lee, I. A. MacKenzie, T. Nagashima, V. Naik, D. Plummer, M. Righi, S. T. Rumbold, M. Schulz, R. B. Skeie, D. S. Stevenson, S. Strode, K. Sudo, S. Szopa, A. Voulgarakis, and G. Zeng
Geosci. Model Dev., 6, 179–206, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-6-179-2013, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-6-179-2013, 2013
Related subject area
Climate and Earth system modeling
cfr (v2024.1.26): a Python package for climate field reconstruction
NEWTS1.0: Numerical model of coastal Erosion by Waves and Transgressive Scarps
Evaluation of isoprene emissions from the coupled model SURFEX–MEGANv2.1
A comprehensive Earth system model (AWI-ESM2.1) with interactive icebergs: effects on surface and deep-ocean characteristics
The regional climate–chemistry–ecology coupling model RegCM-Chem (v4.6)–YIBs (v1.0): development and application
An overview of cloud–radiation denial experiments for the Energy Exascale Earth System Model version 1
The computational and energy cost of simulation and storage for climate science: lessons from CMIP6
Subgrid-scale variability of cloud ice in the ICON-AES 1.3.00
INFERNO-peat v1.0.0: a representation of northern high-latitude peat fires in the JULES-INFERNO global fire model
The 4DEnVar-based weakly coupled land data assimilation system for E3SM version 2
Continental-scale bias-corrected climate and hydrological projections for Australia
G6-1.5K-SAI: a new Geoengineering Model Intercomparison Project (GeoMIP) experiment integrating recent advances in solar radiation modification studies
Modeling the effects of tropospheric ozone on the growth and yield of global staple crops with DSSAT v4.8.0
A one-dimensional urban flow model with an eddy-diffusivity mass-flux (EDMF) scheme and refined turbulent transport (MLUCM v3.0)
DCMIP2016: the tropical cyclone test case
Interactions between atmospheric composition and climate change – progress in understanding and future opportunities from AerChemMIP, PDRMIP, and RFMIP
CD-type discretization for sea ice dynamics in FESOM version 2
CSDMS Data Components: data–model integration tools for Earth surface processes modeling
A generic algorithm to automatically classify urban fabric according to the local climate zone system: implementation in GeoClimate 0.0.1 and application to French cities
Modelling water isotopologues (1H2H16O, 1H217O) in the coupled numerical climate model iLOVECLIM (version 1.1.5)
Accurate assessment of land–atmosphere coupling in climate models requires high-frequency data output
Towards variance-conserving reconstructions of climate indices with Gaussian process regression in an embedding space
A diatom extension to the cGEnIE Earth system model – EcoGEnIE 1.1
Carbon isotopes in the marine biogeochemistry model FESOM2.1-REcoM3
Flux coupling approach on an exchange grid for the IOW Earth System Model (version 1.04.00) of the Baltic Sea region
Using EUREC4A/ATOMIC field campaign data to improve trade wind regimes in the Community Atmosphere Model
Multivariate adjustment of drizzle bias using machine learning in European climate projections
New model ensemble reveals how forcing uncertainty and model structure alter climate simulated across CMIP generations of the Community Earth System Model
Quantifying wildfire drivers and predictability in boreal peatlands using a two-step error-correcting machine learning framework in TeFire v1.0
Benchmarking GOCART-2G in the Goddard Earth Observing System (GEOS)
Energy-conserving physics for nonhydrostatic dynamics in mass coordinate models
Evaluation and optimisation of the soil carbon turnover routine in the MONICA model (version 3.3.1)
Assessing the sensitivity of aerosol mass budget and effective radiative forcing to horizontal grid spacing in E3SMv1 using a regional refinement approach
Towards the definition of a solar forcing dataset for CMIP7
ibicus: a new open-source Python package and comprehensive interface for statistical bias adjustment and evaluation in climate modelling (v1.0.1)
Disentangling the hydrological and hydraulic controls on streamflow variability in Energy Exascale Earth System Model (E3SM) V2 – a case study in the Pantanal region
Constraining the carbon cycle in JULES-ES-1.0
The utility of simulated ocean chlorophyll observations: a case study with the Chlorophyll Observation Simulator Package (version 1) in CESMv2.2
GeoPDNN 1.0: a semi-supervised deep learning neural network using pseudo-labels for three-dimensional shallow strata modelling and uncertainty analysis in urban areas from borehole data
The prototype NOAA Aerosol Reanalysis version 1.0: description of the modeling system and its evaluation
Performance and process-based evaluation of the BARPA-R Australasian regional climate model version 1
Monsoon Mission Coupled Forecast System version 2.0: model description and Indian monsoon simulations
Exploring the ocean mesoscale at reduced computational cost with FESOM 2.5: efficient modeling strategies applied to the Southern Ocean
Implementing detailed nucleation predictions in the Earth system model EC-Earth3.3.4: sulfuric acid-ammonia nucleation
Truly conserving with conservative remapping methods
High-resolution downscaling of CMIP6 Earth system and global climate models using deep learning for Iberia
Earth system modeling on modular supercomputing architecture: coupled atmosphere–ocean simulations with ICON 2.6.6-rc
Global Downscaled Projections for Climate Impacts Research (GDPCIR): preserving quantile trends for modeling future climate impacts
Understanding changes in cloud simulations from E3SM version 1 to version 2
WRF (v4.0)–SUEWS (v2018c) coupled system: development, evaluation and application
Feng Zhu, Julien Emile-Geay, Gregory J. Hakim, Dominique Guillot, Deborah Khider, Robert Tardif, and Walter A. Perkins
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 3409–3431, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-3409-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-3409-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Climate field reconstruction encompasses methods that estimate the evolution of climate in space and time based on natural archives. It is useful to investigate climate variations and validate climate models, but its implementation and use can be difficult for non-experts. This paper introduces a user-friendly Python package called cfr to make these methods more accessible, thanks to the computational and visualization tools that facilitate efficient and reproducible research on past climates.
Rose V. Palermo, J. Taylor Perron, Jason M. Soderblom, Samuel P. D. Birch, Alexander G. Hayes, and Andrew D. Ashton
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 3433–3445, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-3433-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-3433-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Models of rocky coastal erosion help us understand the controls on coastal morphology and evolution. In this paper, we present a simplified model of coastline erosion driven by either uniform erosion where coastline erosion is constant or wave-driven erosion where coastline erosion is a function of the wave power. This model can be used to evaluate how coastline changes reflect climate, sea-level history, material properties, and the relative influence of different erosional processes.
Safae Oumami, Joaquim Arteta, Vincent Guidard, Pierre Tulet, and Paul David Hamer
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 3385–3408, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-3385-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-3385-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
In this paper, we coupled the SURFEX and MEGAN models. The aim of this coupling is to improve the estimation of biogenic fluxes by using the SURFEX canopy environment model. The coupled model results were validated and several sensitivity tests were performed. The coupled-model total annual isoprene flux is 442 Tg; this value is within the range of other isoprene estimates reported. The ultimate aim of this coupling is to predict the impact of climate change on biogenic emissions.
Lars Ackermann, Thomas Rackow, Kai Himstedt, Paul Gierz, Gregor Knorr, and Gerrit Lohmann
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 3279–3301, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-3279-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-3279-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
We present long-term simulations with interactive icebergs in the Southern Ocean. By melting, icebergs reduce the temperature and salinity of the surrounding ocean. In our simulations, we find that this cooling effect of iceberg melting is not limited to the surface ocean but also reaches the deep ocean and propagates northward into all ocean basins. Additionally, the formation of deep-water masses in the Southern Ocean is enhanced.
Nanhong Xie, Tijian Wang, Xiaodong Xie, Xu Yue, Filippo Giorgi, Qian Zhang, Danyang Ma, Rong Song, Beiyao Xu, Shu Li, Bingliang Zhuang, Mengmeng Li, Min Xie, Natalya Andreeva Kilifarska, Georgi Gadzhev, and Reneta Dimitrova
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 3259–3277, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-3259-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-3259-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
For the first time, we coupled a regional climate chemistry model, RegCM-Chem, with a dynamic vegetation model, YIBs, to create a regional climate–chemistry–ecology model, RegCM-Chem–YIBs. We applied it to simulate climatic, chemical, and ecological parameters in East Asia and fully validated it on a variety of observational data. Results show that RegCM-Chem–YIBs model is a valuable tool for studying the terrestrial carbon cycle, atmospheric chemistry, and climate change on a regional scale.
Bryce E. Harrop, Jian Lu, L. Ruby Leung, William K. M. Lau, Kyu-Myong Kim, Brian Medeiros, Brian J. Soden, Gabriel A. Vecchi, Bosong Zhang, and Balwinder Singh
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 3111–3135, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-3111-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-3111-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Seven new experimental setups designed to interfere with cloud radiative heating have been added to the Energy Exascale Earth System Model (E3SM). These experiments include both those that test the mean impact of cloud radiative heating and those examining its covariance with circulations. This paper documents the code changes and steps needed to run these experiments. Results corroborate prior findings for how cloud radiative heating impacts circulations and rainfall patterns.
Mario C. Acosta, Sergi Palomas, Stella V. Paronuzzi Ticco, Gladys Utrera, Joachim Biercamp, Pierre-Antoine Bretonniere, Reinhard Budich, Miguel Castrillo, Arnaud Caubel, Francisco Doblas-Reyes, Italo Epicoco, Uwe Fladrich, Sylvie Joussaume, Alok Kumar Gupta, Bryan Lawrence, Philippe Le Sager, Grenville Lister, Marie-Pierre Moine, Jean-Christophe Rioual, Sophie Valcke, Niki Zadeh, and Venkatramani Balaji
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 3081–3098, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-3081-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-3081-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
We present a collection of performance metrics gathered during the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6), a worldwide initiative to study climate change. We analyse the metrics that resulted from collaboration efforts among many partners and models and describe our findings to demonstrate the utility of our study for the scientific community. The research contributes to understanding climate modelling performance on the current high-performance computing (HPC) architectures.
Sabine Doktorowski, Jan Kretzschmar, Johannes Quaas, Marc Salzmann, and Odran Sourdeval
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 3099–3110, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-3099-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-3099-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Especially over the midlatitudes, precipitation is mainly formed via the ice phase. In this study we focus on the initial snow formation process in the ICON-AES, the aggregation process. We use a stochastical approach for the aggregation parameterization and investigate the influence in the ICON-AES. Therefore, a distribution function of cloud ice is created, which is evaluated with satellite data. The new approach leads to cloud ice loss and an improvement in the process rate bias.
Katie R. Blackford, Matthew Kasoar, Chantelle Burton, Eleanor Burke, Iain Colin Prentice, and Apostolos Voulgarakis
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 3063–3079, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-3063-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-3063-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Peatlands are globally important stores of carbon which are being increasingly threatened by wildfires with knock-on effects on the climate system. Here we introduce a novel peat fire parameterization in the northern high latitudes to the INFERNO global fire model. Representing peat fires increases annual burnt area across the high latitudes, alongside improvements in how we capture year-to-year variation in burning and emissions.
Pengfei Shi, L. Ruby Leung, Bin Wang, Kai Zhang, Samson M. Hagos, and Shixuan Zhang
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 3025–3040, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-3025-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-3025-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Improving climate predictions have profound socio-economic impacts. This study introduces a new weakly coupled land data assimilation (WCLDA) system for a coupled climate model. We demonstrate improved simulation of soil moisture and temperature in many global regions and throughout the soil layers. Furthermore, significant improvements are also found in reproducing the time evolution of the 2012 US Midwest drought. The WCLDA system provides the groundwork for future predictability studies.
Justin Peter, Elisabeth Vogel, Wendy Sharples, Ulrike Bende-Michl, Louise Wilson, Pandora Hope, Andrew Dowdy, Greg Kociuba, Sri Srikanthan, Vi Co Duong, Jake Roussis, Vjekoslav Matic, Zaved Khan, Alison Oke, Margot Turner, Stuart Baron-Hay, Fiona Johnson, Raj Mehrotra, Ashish Sharma, Marcus Thatcher, Ali Azarvinand, Steven Thomas, Ghyslaine Boschat, Chantal Donnelly, and Robert Argent
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 2755–2781, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-2755-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-2755-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
We detail the production of datasets and communication to end users of high-resolution projections of rainfall, runoff, and soil moisture for the entire Australian continent. This is important as previous projections for Australia were for small regions and used differing techniques for their projections, making comparisons difficult across Australia's varied climate zones. The data will be beneficial for research purposes and to aid adaptation to climate change.
Daniele Visioni, Alan Robock, Jim Haywood, Matthew Henry, Simone Tilmes, Douglas G. MacMartin, Ben Kravitz, Sarah J. Doherty, John Moore, Chris Lennard, Shingo Watanabe, Helene Muri, Ulrike Niemeier, Olivier Boucher, Abu Syed, Temitope S. Egbebiyi, Roland Séférian, and Ilaria Quaglia
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 2583–2596, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-2583-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-2583-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
This paper describes a new experimental protocol for the Geoengineering Model Intercomparison Project (GeoMIP). In it, we describe the details of a new simulation of sunlight reflection using the stratospheric aerosols that climate models are supposed to run, and we explain the reasons behind each choice we made when defining the protocol.
Jose Rafael Guarin, Jonas Jägermeyr, Elizabeth A. Ainsworth, Fabio A. A. Oliveira, Senthold Asseng, Kenneth Boote, Joshua Elliott, Lisa Emberson, Ian Foster, Gerrit Hoogenboom, David Kelly, Alex C. Ruane, and Katrina Sharps
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 2547–2567, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-2547-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-2547-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
The effects of ozone (O3) stress on crop photosynthesis and leaf senescence were added to maize, rice, soybean, and wheat crop models. The modified models reproduced growth and yields under different O3 levels measured in field experiments and reported in the literature. The combined interactions between O3 and additional stresses were reproduced with the new models. These updated crop models can be used to simulate impacts of O3 stress under future climate change and air pollution scenarios.
Jiachen Lu, Negin Nazarian, Melissa Anne Hart, E. Scott Krayenhoff, and Alberto Martilli
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 2525–2545, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-2525-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-2525-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
This study enhances urban canopy models by refining key assumptions. Simulations for various urban scenarios indicate discrepancies in turbulent transport efficiency for flow properties. We propose two modifications that involve characterizing diffusion coefficients for momentum and turbulent kinetic energy separately and introducing a physics-based
mass-fluxterm. These adjustments enhance the model's performance, offering more reliable temperature and surface flux estimates.
Justin L. Willson, Kevin A. Reed, Christiane Jablonowski, James Kent, Peter H. Lauritzen, Ramachandran Nair, Mark A. Taylor, Paul A. Ullrich, Colin M. Zarzycki, David M. Hall, Don Dazlich, Ross Heikes, Celal Konor, David Randall, Thomas Dubos, Yann Meurdesoif, Xi Chen, Lucas Harris, Christian Kühnlein, Vivian Lee, Abdessamad Qaddouri, Claude Girard, Marco Giorgetta, Daniel Reinert, Hiroaki Miura, Tomoki Ohno, and Ryuji Yoshida
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 2493–2507, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-2493-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-2493-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Accurate simulation of tropical cyclones (TCs) is essential to understanding their behavior in a changing climate. One way this is accomplished is through model intercomparison projects, where results from multiple climate models are analyzed to provide benchmark solutions for the wider climate modeling community. This study describes and analyzes the previously developed TC test case for nine climate models in an intercomparison project, providing solutions that aid in model development.
Stephanie Fiedler, Vaishali Naik, Fiona M. O'Connor, Christopher J. Smith, Paul Griffiths, Ryan J. Kramer, Toshihiko Takemura, Robert J. Allen, Ulas Im, Matthew Kasoar, Angshuman Modak, Steven Turnock, Apostolos Voulgarakis, Duncan Watson-Parris, Daniel M. Westervelt, Laura J. Wilcox, Alcide Zhao, William J. Collins, Michael Schulz, Gunnar Myhre, and Piers M. Forster
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 2387–2417, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-2387-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-2387-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Climate scientists want to better understand modern climate change. Thus, climate model experiments are performed and compared. The results of climate model experiments differ, as assessed in the latest Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) assessment report. This article gives insights into the challenges and outlines opportunities for further improving the understanding of climate change. It is based on views of a group of experts in atmospheric composition–climate interactions.
Sergey Danilov, Carolin Mehlmann, Dmitry Sidorenko, and Qiang Wang
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 2287–2297, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-2287-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-2287-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Sea ice models are a necessary component of climate models. At very high resolution they are capable of simulating linear kinematic features, such as leads, which are important for better prediction of heat exchanges between the ocean and atmosphere. Two new discretizations are described which improve the sea ice component of the Finite volumE Sea ice–Ocean Model (FESOM version 2) by allowing simulations of finer scales.
Tian Gan, Gregory E. Tucker, Eric W. H. Hutton, Mark D. Piper, Irina Overeem, Albert J. Kettner, Benjamin Campforts, Julia M. Moriarty, Brianna Undzis, Ethan Pierce, and Lynn McCready
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 2165–2185, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-2165-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-2165-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
This study presents the design, implementation, and application of the CSDMS Data Components. The case studies demonstrate that the Data Components provide a consistent way to access heterogeneous datasets from multiple sources, and to seamlessly integrate them with various models for Earth surface process modeling. The Data Components support the creation of open data–model integration workflows to improve the research transparency and reproducibility.
Jérémy Bernard, Erwan Bocher, Matthieu Gousseff, François Leconte, and Elisabeth Le Saux Wiederhold
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 2077–2116, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-2077-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-2077-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Geographical features may have a considerable effect on local climate. The local climate zone (LCZ) system proposed by Stewart and Oke (2012) is seen as a standard approach for classifying any zone according to a set of geographic indicators. While many methods already exist to map the LCZ, only a few tools are openly and freely available. We present the algorithm implemented in GeoClimate software to identify the LCZ of any place in the world using OpenStreetMap data.
Thomas Extier, Thibaut Caley, and Didier M. Roche
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 2117–2139, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-2117-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-2117-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Stable water isotopes are used to infer changes in the hydrological cycle for different time periods in climatic archive and climate models. We present the implementation of the δ2H and δ17O water isotopes in the coupled climate model iLOVECLIM and calculate the d- and 17O-excess. Results of a simulation under preindustrial conditions show that the model correctly reproduces the water isotope distribution in the atmosphere and ocean in comparison to data and other global circulation models.
Kirsten L. Findell, Zun Yin, Eunkyo Seo, Paul A. Dirmeyer, Nathan P. Arnold, Nathaniel Chaney, Megan D. Fowler, Meng Huang, David M. Lawrence, Po-Lun Ma, and Joseph A. Santanello Jr.
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 1869–1883, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-1869-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-1869-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
We outline a request for sub-daily data to accurately capture the process-level connections between land states, surface fluxes, and the boundary layer response. This high-frequency model output will allow for more direct comparison with observational field campaigns on process-relevant timescales, enable demonstration of inter-model spread in land–atmosphere coupling processes, and aid in targeted identification of sources of deficiencies and opportunities for improvement of the models.
Marlene Klockmann, Udo von Toussaint, and Eduardo Zorita
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 1765–1787, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-1765-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-1765-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Reconstructions of climate variability before the observational period rely on climate proxies and sophisticated statistical models to link the proxy information and climate variability. Existing models tend to underestimate the true magnitude of variability, especially if the proxies contain non-climatic noise. We present and test a promising new framework for climate-index reconstructions, based on Gaussian processes, which reconstructs robust variability estimates from noisy and sparse data.
Aaron A. Naidoo-Bagwell, Fanny M. Monteiro, Katharine R. Hendry, Scott Burgan, Jamie D. Wilson, Ben A. Ward, Andy Ridgwell, and Daniel J. Conley
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 1729–1748, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-1729-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-1729-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
As an extension to the EcoGEnIE 1.0 Earth system model that features a diverse plankton community, EcoGEnIE 1.1 includes siliceous plankton diatoms and also considers their impact on biogeochemical cycles. With updates to existing nutrient cycles and the introduction of the silicon cycle, we see improved model performance relative to observational data. Through a more functionally diverse plankton community, the new model enables more comprehensive future study of ocean ecology.
Martin Butzin, Ying Ye, Christoph Völker, Özgür Gürses, Judith Hauck, and Peter Köhler
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 1709–1727, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-1709-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-1709-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
In this paper we describe the implementation of the carbon isotopes 13C and 14C into the marine biogeochemistry model FESOM2.1-REcoM3 and present results of long-term test simulations. Our model results are largely consistent with marine carbon isotope reconstructions for the pre-anthropogenic period, but also exhibit some discrepancies.
Sven Karsten, Hagen Radtke, Matthias Gröger, Ha T. M. Ho-Hagemann, Hossein Mashayekh, Thomas Neumann, and H. E. Markus Meier
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 1689–1708, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-1689-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-1689-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
This paper describes the development of a regional Earth System Model for the Baltic Sea region. In contrast to conventional coupling approaches, the presented model includes a flux calculator operating on a common exchange grid. This approach automatically ensures a locally consistent treatment of fluxes and simplifies the exchange of model components. The presented model can be used for various scientific questions, such as studies of natural variability and ocean–atmosphere interactions.
Skyler Graap and Colin M. Zarzycki
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 1627–1650, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-1627-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-1627-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
A key target for improving climate models is how low, bright clouds are predicted over tropical oceans, since they have important consequences for the Earth's energy budget. A climate model has been updated to improve the physical realism of the treatment of how momentum is moved up and down in the atmosphere. By comparing this updated model to real-world observations from balloon launches, it can be shown to more accurately depict atmospheric structure in trade-wind areas close to the Equator.
Georgia Lazoglou, Theo Economou, Christina Anagnostopoulou, George Zittis, Anna Tzyrkalli, Pantelis Georgiades, and Jos Lelieveld
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-45, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-45, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
This study focused on the important issue of the drizzle bias effect in regional climate models, described by an over-prediction of the number of rainy days while underestimating associated precipitation amounts. For this purpose, two distinct methodologies were applied and rigorously evaluated. These results are encouraging for using the multivariate machine learning method of Random Forest for increasing the accuracy of climate models, concerning the projection of the number of wet days.
Marika M. Holland, Cecile Hannay, John Fasullo, Alexandra Jahn, Jennifer E. Kay, Michael Mills, Isla R. Simpson, William Wieder, Peter Lawrence, Erik Kluzek, and David Bailey
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 1585–1602, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-1585-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-1585-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Climate evolves in response to changing forcings, as prescribed in simulations. Models and forcings are updated over time to reflect new understanding. This makes it difficult to attribute simulation differences to either model or forcing changes. Here we present new simulations which enable the separation of model structure and forcing influence between two widely used simulation sets. Results indicate a strong influence of aerosol emission uncertainty on historical climate.
Rongyun Tang, Mingzhou Jin, Jiafu Mao, Daniel M. Ricciuto, Anping Chen, and Yulong Zhang
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 1525–1542, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-1525-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-1525-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Carbon-rich boreal peatlands are at risk of burning. The reproducibility and predictability of rare peatland fire events are investigated by constructing a two-step error-correcting machine learning framework to tackle such complex systems. Fire occurrence and impacts are highly predictable with our approach. Factor-controlling simulations revealed that temperature, moisture, and freeze–thaw cycles control boreal peatland fires, indicating thermal impacts on causing peat fires.
Allison B. Collow, Peter R. Colarco, Arlindo M. da Silva, Virginie Buchard, Huisheng Bian, Mian Chin, Sampa Das, Ravi Govindaraju, Dongchul Kim, and Valentina Aquila
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 1443–1468, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-1443-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-1443-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
The GOCART aerosol module within the Goddard Earth Observing System recently underwent a major refactoring and update to the representation of physical processes. Code changes that were included in GOCART Second Generation (GOCART-2G) are documented, and we establish a benchmark simulation that is to be used for future development of the system. The 4-year benchmark simulation was evaluated using in situ and spaceborne measurements to develop a baseline and prioritize future development.
Oksana Guba, Mark A. Taylor, Peter A. Bosler, Christopher Eldred, and Peter H. Lauritzen
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 1429–1442, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-1429-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-1429-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
We want to reduce errors in the moist energy budget in numerical atmospheric models. We study a few common assumptions and mechanisms that are used for the moist physics. Some mechanisms are more consistent with the underlying equations. Separately, we study how assumptions about models' thermodynamics affect the modeled energy of precipitation. We also explain how to conserve energy in the moist physics for nonhydrostatic models.
Konstantin Aiteew, Jarno Rouhiainen, Claas Nendel, and René Dechow
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 1349–1385, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-1349-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-1349-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
This study evaluated the biogeochemical model MONICA and its performance in simulating soil organic carbon changes. MONICA can reproduce plant growth, carbon and nitrogen dynamics, soil water and temperature. The model results were compared with five established carbon turnover models. With the exception of certain sites, adequate reproduction of soil organic carbon stock change rates was achieved. The MONICA model was capable of performing similar to or even better than the other models.
Jianfeng Li, Kai Zhang, Taufiq Hassan, Shixuan Zhang, Po-Lun Ma, Balwinder Singh, Qiyang Yan, and Huilin Huang
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 1327–1347, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-1327-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-1327-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
By comparing E3SM simulations with and without regional refinement, we find that model horizontal grid spacing considerably affects the simulated aerosol mass budget, aerosol–cloud interactions, and the effective radiative forcing of anthropogenic aerosols. The study identifies the critical physical processes strongly influenced by model resolution. It also highlights the benefit of applying regional refinement in future modeling studies at higher or even convection-permitting resolutions.
Bernd Funke, Thierry Dudok de Wit, Ilaria Ermolli, Margit Haberreiter, Doug Kinnison, Daniel Marsh, Hilde Nesse, Annika Seppälä, Miriam Sinnhuber, and Ilya Usoskin
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 1217–1227, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-1217-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-1217-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
We outline a road map for the preparation of a solar forcing dataset for the upcoming Phase 7 of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP7), considering the latest scientific advances made in the reconstruction of solar forcing and in the understanding of climate response while also addressing the issues that were raised during CMIP6.
Fiona Raphaela Spuler, Jakob Benjamin Wessel, Edward Comyn-Platt, James Varndell, and Chiara Cagnazzo
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 1249–1269, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-1249-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-1249-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Before using climate models to study the impacts of climate change, bias adjustment is commonly applied to the models to ensure that they correspond with observations at a local scale. However, this can introduce undesirable distortions into the climate model. In this paper, we present an open-source python package called ibicus to enable the comparison and detailed evaluation of bias adjustment methods, facilitating their transparent and rigorous application.
Donghui Xu, Gautam Bisht, Zeli Tan, Chang Liao, Tian Zhou, Hong-Yi Li, and L. Ruby Leung
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 1197–1215, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-1197-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-1197-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
We aim to disentangle the hydrological and hydraulic controls on streamflow variability in a fully coupled earth system model. We found that calibrating only one process (i.e., traditional calibration procedure) will result in unrealistic parameter values and poor performance of the water cycle, while the simulated streamflow is improved. To address this issue, we further proposed a two-step calibration procedure to reconcile the impacts from hydrological and hydraulic processes on streamflow.
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
Short summary
We can run simulations of the land surface and carbon cycle, using computer models to help us understand and predict climate change and its impacts. These simulations are not perfect reproductions of the real land surface, and that can make them less effective tools. We use new statistical and computational techniques to help us understand how different our models are from the real land surface, how to make them more realistic, and how well we can simulate past and future climate.
Genevieve L. Clow, Nicole S. Lovenduski, Michael N. Levy, Keith Lindsay, and Jennifer E. Kay
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 975–995, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-975-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-975-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Satellite observations of chlorophyll allow us to study marine phytoplankton on a global scale; yet some of these observations are missing due to clouds and other issues. To investigate the impact of missing data, we developed a satellite simulator for chlorophyll in an Earth system model. We found that missing data can impact the global mean chlorophyll by nearly 20 %. The simulated observations provide a more direct comparison to real-world data and can be used to improve model validation.
Jiateng Guo, Xuechuang Xu, Luyuan Wang, Xulei Wang, Lixin Wu, Mark Jessell, Vitaliy Ogarko, Zhibin Liu, and Yufei Zheng
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 957–973, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-957-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-957-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
This study proposes a semi-supervised learning algorithm using pseudo-labels for 3D geological modelling. We establish a 3D geological model using borehole data from a complex real urban local survey area in Shenyang and make an uncertainty analysis of this model. The method effectively expands the sample space, which is suitable for geomodelling and uncertainty analysis from boreholes. The modelling results perform well in terms of spatial morphology and geological semantics.
Shih-Wei Wei, Mariusz Pagowski, Arlindo da Silva, Cheng-Hsuan Lu, and Bo Huang
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 795–813, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-795-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-795-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
This study describes the modeling system and the evaluation results for the first prototype version of a global aerosol reanalysis product at NOAA, prototype NOAA Aerosol ReAnalysis version 1.0 (pNARA v1.0). We evaluated pNARA v1.0 against independent datasets and compared it with other reanalyses. We identified deficiencies in the system (both in the forecast model and in the data assimilation system) and the uncertainties that exist in our reanalysis.
Emma Howard, Chun-Hsu Su, Christian Stassen, Rajashree Naha, Harvey Ye, Acacia Pepler, Samuel S. Bell, Andrew J. Dowdy, Simon O. Tucker, and Charmaine Franklin
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 731–757, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-731-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-731-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
The BARPA-R modelling configuration has been developed to produce high-resolution climate hazard projections within the Australian region. When using boundary driving data from quasi-observed historical conditions, BARPA-R shows good performance with errors generally on par with reanalysis products. BARPA-R also captures trends, known modes of climate variability, large-scale weather processes, and multivariate relationships.
Deepeshkumar Jain, Suryachandra A. Rao, Ramu A. Dandi, Prasanth A. Pillai, Ankur Srivastava, Maheswar Pradhan, and Kiran V. Gangadharan
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 709–729, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-709-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-709-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
The present paper discusses and evaluates the new Monsoon Mission Coupled Forecast System model (MMCFS) version 2.0 which upgrades the currently operational MMCFS v1.0 at the Indian Meteorological Department, India. The individual model components have been substantially upgraded independently by their respective scientific groups. MMCFS v2.0 includes these upgrades in the operational coupled model. The new model shows significant skill improvement in simulating the Indian monsoon.
Nathan Beech, Thomas Rackow, Tido Semmler, and Thomas Jung
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 529–543, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-529-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-529-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Cost-reducing modeling strategies are applied to high-resolution simulations of the Southern Ocean in a changing climate. They are evaluated with respect to observations and traditional, lower-resolution modeling methods. The simulations effectively reproduce small-scale ocean flows seen in satellite data and are largely consistent with traditional model simulations after 4 °C of warming. Small-scale flows are found to intensify near bathymetric features and to become more variable.
Carl Svenhag, Moa Kristina Sporre, Tinja Olenius, Daniel Yazgi, Sara Marie Blichner, Lars Peter Nieradzik, and Pontus Roldin
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-2665, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-2665, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Our research shows the importance of modeling new particle formation (NPF) and growth of particles in the atmosphere on a global scale, as they influence the outcomes of clouds and our climate. With the global model EC-Earth3 we showed that using a new method for NPF modeling, which includes new detailed processes with NH3 and H2SO4, significantly impacted the number of particles in the air and clouds. It also changed the radiation balance in the same magnitude as man-made greenhouse emissions.
Karl E. Taylor
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 415–430, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-415-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-415-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Remapping gridded data in a way that preserves the conservative properties of the climate system can be essential in coupling model components and for accurate assessment of the system’s energy and mass constituents. Remapping packages capable of handling a wide variety of grids can, for some common grids, calculate remapping weights that are somewhat inaccurate. Correcting for these errors, guidelines are provided to ensure conservation when the weights are used in practice.
Pedro M. M. Soares, Frederico Johannsen, Daniela C. A. Lima, Gil Lemos, Virgílio A. Bento, and Angelina Bushenkova
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 229–259, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-229-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-229-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
This study uses deep learning (DL) to downscale global climate models for the Iberian Peninsula. Four DL architectures were evaluated and trained using historical climate data and then used to downscale future projections from the global models. These show agreement with the original models and reveal a warming of 2 ºC to 6 ºC, along with decreasing precipitation in western Iberia after 2040. This approach offers key regional climate change information for adaptation strategies in the region.
Abhiraj Bishnoi, Olaf Stein, Catrin I. Meyer, René Redler, Norbert Eicker, Helmuth Haak, Lars Hoffmann, Daniel Klocke, Luis Kornblueh, and Estela Suarez
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 261–273, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-261-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-261-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
We enabled the weather and climate model ICON to run in a high-resolution coupled atmosphere–ocean setup on the JUWELS supercomputer, where the ocean and the model I/O runs on the CPU Cluster, while the atmosphere is running simultaneously on GPUs. Compared to a simulation performed on CPUs only, our approach reduces energy consumption by 45 % with comparable runtimes. The experiments serve as preparation for efficient computing of kilometer-scale climate models on future supercomputing systems.
Diana R. Gergel, Steven B. Malevich, Kelly E. McCusker, Emile Tenezakis, Michael T. Delgado, Meredith A. Fish, and Robert E. Kopp
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 191–227, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-191-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-191-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
The freely available Global Downscaled Projections for Climate Impacts Research (GDPCIR) dataset gives researchers a new tool for studying how future climate will evolve at a local or regional level, corresponding to the latest global climate model simulations prepared as part of the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s Sixth Assessment Report. Those simulations represent an enormous advance in quality, detail, and scope that GDPCIR translates to the local level.
Yuying Zhang, Shaocheng Xie, Yi Qin, Wuyin Lin, Jean-Christophe Golaz, Xue Zheng, Po-Lun Ma, Yun Qian, Qi Tang, Christopher R. Terai, and Meng Zhang
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 169–189, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-169-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-169-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
We performed systematic evaluation of clouds simulated in the Energy
Exascale Earth System Model (E3SMv2) to document model performance and understand what updates in E3SMv2 have caused changes in clouds from E3SMv1 to E3SMv2. We find that stratocumulus clouds along the subtropical west coast of continents are dramatically improved, primarily due to the retuning done in CLUBB. This study offers additional insights into clouds simulated in E3SMv2 and will benefit future E3SM developments.
Exascale Earth System Model (E3SMv2) to document model performance and understand what updates in E3SMv2 have caused changes in clouds from E3SMv1 to E3SMv2. We find that stratocumulus clouds along the subtropical west coast of continents are dramatically improved, primarily due to the retuning done in CLUBB. This study offers additional insights into clouds simulated in E3SMv2 and will benefit future E3SM developments.
Ting Sun, Hamidreza Omidvar, Zhenkun Li, Ning Zhang, Wenjuan Huang, Simone Kotthaus, Helen C. Ward, Zhiwen Luo, and Sue Grimmond
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 91–116, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-91-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-91-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
For the first time, we coupled a state-of-the-art urban land surface model – Surface Urban Energy and Water Scheme (SUEWS) – with the widely-used Weather Research and Forecasting (WRF) model, creating an open-source tool that may benefit multiple applications. We tested our new system at two UK sites and demonstrated its potential by examining how human activities in various areas of Greater London influence local weather conditions.
Cited articles
Bodas-Salcedo, A., Webb, M. J., Bony, S., Chepfer, H., Dufresne, J. L., Klein,
S. A., Zhang, Y., Marchand, R., Haynes, J. M., Pincus, R., and John, V. O.:
COSP: Satellite simulation software for model assessment, B.
Am. Meteorol. Soc., 92, 1023–1043,
https://doi.org/10.1175/2011BAMS2856.1, 2011.
Collier, N., Hoffman, F. M., Lawrence, D. M., Keppel-Aleks, G., Koven, C.
D., Riley, W. J., Mu, M., and Randerson, J. T.: The International Land Model
Benchmarking System (ILAMB): Design and Theory, J. Adv. Model. Earth Syst., 10, 2731–2754,
https://doi.org/10.1029/2018MS001354, 2018.
Covey, C., Gleckler, P. J., Doutriaux, C., Williams, D. N., Dai, A., Fasullo, J.,
Trenberth, K., and Berg, A.: Metrics for the diurnal cycle of precipitation:
Toward routine benchmarks for climate models, J. Climate, 29, 4461–4471,
https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-15-0664.1, 2016.
Doutriaux, C., Taylor, K. E., and Nadeau, D.: CMOR3 and PrePARE
Documentation, 128 pp., Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, CA, 2017.
Durack, P. J., Taylor, K. E., Eyring, V., Ames, S. K., Hoang, T., Nadeau, D., Doutriaux, C., Stockhause, M., and Gleckler, P. J.: Toward standardized data sets
for climate model experimentation, Eos, 99,
https://doi.org/10.1029/2018EO101751, 2018.
EEA: Overview of reported national policies and measures on climate change
mitigation in Europe in 2015, Information reported by Member States under
the European Union Monitoring Mechanism Regulation Rep.,
Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg, 2015.
Eyring, V. and Lamarque, J.-F.: Global chemistry-climate modeling and
evaluation, EOS, Transactions of the American Geophysical Union, 93,
539–539, 2012.
Eyring, V., Bony, S., Meehl, G. A., Senior, C. A., Stevens, B., Stouffer, R. J., and Taylor, K. E.: Overview of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6) experimental design and organization, Geosci. Model Dev., 9, 1937–1958, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-1937-2016, 2016a.
Eyring, V., Gleckler, P. J., Heinze, C., Stouffer, R. J., Taylor, K. E., Balaji, V., Guilyardi, E., Joussaume, S., Kindermann, S., Lawrence, B. N., Meehl, G. A., Righi, M., and Williams, D. N.: Towards improved and more routine Earth system model evaluation in CMIP, Earth Syst. Dynam., 7, 813–830, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-7-813-2016, 2016b.
Eyring, V., Righi, M., Lauer, A., Evaldsson, M., Wenzel, S., Jones, C., Anav, A., Andrews, O., Cionni, I., Davin, E. L., Deser, C., Ehbrecht, C., Friedlingstein, P., Gleckler, P., Gottschaldt, K.-D., Hagemann, S., Juckes, M., Kindermann, S., Krasting, J., Kunert, D., Levine, R., Loew, A., Mäkelä, J., Martin, G., Mason, E., Phillips, A. S., Read, S., Rio, C., Roehrig, R., Senftleben, D., Sterl, A., van Ulft, L. H., Walton, J., Wang, S., and Williams, K. D.: ESMValTool (v1.0) – a community diagnostic and performance metrics tool for routine evaluation of Earth system models in CMIP, Geosci. Model Dev., 9, 1747–1802, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-1747-2016, 2016c.
Eyring, V., Bock, L., Lauer, A., Righi, M., Schlund, M., Andela, B., Arnone, E., Bellprat, O., Brötz, B., Caron, L.-P., Carvalhais, N., Cionni, I., Cortesi, N., Crezee, B., Davin, E., Davini, P., Debeire, K., de Mora, L., Deser, C., Docquier, D., Earnshaw, P., Ehbrecht, C., Gier, B. K., Gonzalez-Reviriego, N., Goodman, P., Hagemann, S., Hardiman, S., Hassler, B., Hunter, A., Kadow, C., Kindermann, S., Koirala, S., Koldunov, N. V., Lejeune, Q., Lembo, V., Lovato, T., Lucarini, V., Massonnet, F., Müller, B., Pandde, A., Pérez-Zanón, N., Phillips, A., Predoi, V., Russell, J., Sellar, A., Serva, F., Stacke, T., Swaminathan, R., Torralba, V., Vegas-Regidor, J., von Hardenberg, J., Weigel, K., and Zimmermann, K.: ESMValTool v2.0 – Extended set of large-scale diagnostics for quasi-operational and comprehensive evaluation of Earth system models in CMIP, Geosci. Model Dev., https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-2019-291, accepted, 2020.
Ferraro, R., Waliser, D. E., Gleckler, P., Taylor, K. E., and Eyring, V.:
Evolving obs4MIPs To Support Phase 6 Of The Coupled Model Intercomparison
Project (CMIP6), B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 96, 131–133, https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-14-00216.1, 2015.
Gates, W. L.: AMIP: the Atmospheric Model Intercomparison Project,
B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 73, 1962–1970, 1992.
Gleckler, P., Taylor, K. E., and Doutriaux, C.: Performance metrics for
climate models, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 113, D06104,
https://doi.org/10.1029/2007jd008972, 2008.
Gleckler, P., Ferraro, R., and Waliser, D. E.: Better use of satellite data in
evaluating climate models contributing to CMIP and assessed by IPCC: Joint
DOE-NASA workshop; LLNL, 12–13 October 2010, EOS, 92, 172,
2011.
Gleckler, P. J., Doutriaux, C., Durack, P. J., Taylor, K. E., Zhang, Y., Williams, D.
N., Mason, E., and Servonnat, J.: A more powerful reality test for
climate models, Eos, 97, https://doi.org/10.1029/2016EO051663, 2016.
Gleckler, P. J., Taylor, K. E., Durack, P. J., Ferraro, R., Baird, J.,
Finkensieper, S., Stevens, S., Tuma, M., and Nadeau, D.: The obs4MIPs data
specifications 2.1, in preparation, 2020.
Hollmann, R., Merchant, C. J., Saunders, R., Downy, C., Buchwitz, M.,
Cazenave, A., Chuvieco, E., Defourny, P., de Leeuw, G., Forsberg, R.,
Holzer-Popp, T., Paul, F., Sandven, S., Sathyendranath, S., van Roozendael, M., and Wagner,
W.: The ESA Climate Change Initiative: Satellite Data Records for
Essential Climate Variables, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 94, 1541–1552, https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-11-00254.1, 2013.
IPCC: Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science BasisRep., 1535 pp., IPCC,
Geneva, Switzerland, 2013.
IPCC: Climate Change 2014: Synthesis Report. Contribution of Working Groups
I, II and III to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel
on Climate Change Rep., 151 pp., IPCC, Geneva, Switzerland, 2014.
Juckes, M., Taylor, K. E., Durack, P. J., Lawrence, B., Mizielinski, M. S., Pamment, A., Peterschmitt, J.-Y., Rixen, M., and Sénési, S.: The CMIP6 Data Request (DREQ, version 01.00.31), Geosci. Model Dev., 13, 201–224, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-201-2020, 2020.
Lee, H., Goodman, A., McGibbney, L., Waliser, D. E., Kim, J., Loikith, P. C., Gibson, P. B., and Massoud, E. C.: Regional Climate Model Evaluation System powered by Apache Open Climate Workbench v1.3.0: an enabling tool for facilitating regional climate studies, Geosci. Model Dev., 11, 4435–4449, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-4435-2018, 2018.
Meehl, G. A., Covey, C., Delworth, T., Latif, M., McAvaney, B.,
Mitchell, J. F. B., Stouffer, R. J., and Taylor, K. E.: The WCRP CMIP3 multi-model
dataset: A new era in climate change research, B. Am.
Meteorol. Soc., 88, 1383–1394, 2007.
NCA: U. S. National Climate Assessment Rep., 1717 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW,
Suite 250, Washington, D.C., 2014.
obs4MIPs: Observations for Model Intercomparisons Project, available at: https://esgf-node.llnl.gov/projects/obs4mips/, last access: 26 June 2020.
Phillips, A. S., Deser, C., and Fasullo, J.: Evaluating modes of variability
in climate models, Eos, Transactions American Geophysical Union, 95,
453–455, 2014.
Potter, G. L., Carriere, L., Hertz, J. D., Bosilovich, M., Duffy, D., Lee,
T., and Williams, D. N.: Enabling reanalysis research using the
collaborative reanalysis technical environment (CREATE), B. Am. Meteorol.
Soc., 99, 677–687, https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-17-0174.1, 2018.
Reichler, T. and Kim, J.: How well do coupled models simulate today's
climate?, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 89, 303,
https://doi.org/10.1175/bams-89-3-303, 2008.
Righi, M., Andela, B., Eyring, V., Lauer, A., Predoi, V., Schlund, M., Vegas-Regidor, J., Bock, L., Brötz, B., de Mora, L., Diblen, F., Dreyer, L., Drost, N., Earnshaw, P., Hassler, B., Koldunov, N., Little, B., Loosveldt Tomas, S., and Zimmermann, K.: Earth System Model Evaluation Tool (ESMValTool) v2.0 – technical overview, Geosci. Model Dev., 13, 1179–1199, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-1179-2020, 2020.
Schröder, M., Lockhoff, M., Shi, L., August, T., Bennartz, R., Brogniez,
H., Calbet, X., Fell, F., Forsythe, J., Gambacorta, A., Ho, S.-P.,
Kursinski, E. R., Reale, A., Trent, T., and Yang, Q.: The GEWEX Water Vapor
Assessment: Overview and Introduction to Results and Recommendations, Remote
Sens., 11, 251, https://doi.org/10.3390/rs11030251, 2019.
Stockhause, M. and Lautenschlager, M.: CMIP6 Data Cita-tion of Evolving
Data, Data Science Journal, 16, 1–13, https://doi.org/10.5334/dsj-2017-030,
2017.
Stouffer, R. J., Eyring, V., Meehl, G. A., Bony, S., Senior, C., Stevens,
B., and Taylor, K. E.: CMIP5 Scientific Gaps and Recommendations for CMIP6,
B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 98, 95–105, 2017.
Taylor, K. E., Stouffer, R. J., and Meehl, G. A.: A Summary of the CMIP5
Experiment Design, White paper, available at:
https://pcmdi.llnl.gov/mips/cmip5/docs/Taylor_CMIP5_design.pdf (last access: 27 June 2016), 2009.
Taylor, K. E., Stouffer, R. J., and Meehl, G. A.: An Overview of CMIP5 and the
Experiment Design, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 93, 485–498, 2012.
Teixeira, J., Waliser, D. E., Ferraro, R., Gleckler, P., Lee, T., and Potter, G.: Satellite Observations for CMIP5: The Genesis of Obs4MIPs, B.
Am. Meteorol. Soc., 95, 1329–1334, https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-12-00204.1, 2014.
Tian, B. and Dong, X.: The double-ITCZ bias in CMIP3, CMIP5, and CMIP6
models based on annual mean precipitation, Geophys. Res. Lett., 47, e2020GL087232,
https://doi.org/10.1029/2020GL087232, 2020.
Tsushima, Y., Brient, F., Klein, S. A., Konsta, D., Nam, C. C., Qu, X., Williams, K. D., Sherwood, S. C., Suzuki, K., and Zelinka, M. D.: The Cloud Feedback Model Intercomparison Project (CFMIP) Diagnostic Codes Catalogue – metrics, diagnostics and methodologies to evaluate, understand and improve the representation of clouds and cloud feedbacks in climate models, Geosci. Model Dev., 10, 4285–4305, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-10-4285-2017, 2017.
Waliser, D., Seo, K. W., Schubert, S. and Njoku, E.: Global water cycle
agreement in the climate models assessed in the IPCC AR4, Geophys.
Res. Lett., 34, L16705, https://doi.org/10.1029/2007GL030675, 2007.
Waliser, D. E., Li, J. F., Woods, C., Austin, R., Bacmeister, J., Chern, J., Genio, A.
D., Jiang, J., Kuang, Z., Meng, H., Minnis, P., Platnick, S., Rossow, W. B., Stephens,
G., Sun-Mack, S., Tao, W. K., Tompkins, A., Vane, D., Walker, C., and
Wu, D.: Cloud Ice: A Climate Model Challenge With Signs and Expectations
of Progress, J. Geophys. Res.,
114, D00A21, https://doi.org/10.1029/2008JD010015, 2009.
Webb, M. J., Andrews, T., Bodas-Salcedo, A., Bony, S., Bretherton, C. S., Chadwick, R., Chepfer, H., Douville, H., Good, P., Kay, J. E., Klein, S. A., Marchand, R., Medeiros, B., Siebesma, A. P., Skinner, C. B., Stevens, B., Tselioudis, G., Tsushima, Y., and Watanabe, M.: The Cloud Feedback Model Intercomparison Project (CFMIP) contribution to CMIP6, Geosci. Model Dev., 10, 359–384, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-10-359-2017, 2017.
Whitehall, K., Mattmann, C., Waliser, D., Kim, J., Goodale, C., Hart, A.,
Ramirez, P., Zimdars, P., Crichton, D., Jenkins, G., Jones, C., Asrar, G., and
Hewitson, B.: Building model evaluation and decision support capacity for
CORDEX, WMO Bulletin, 61, 29–34, 2012.
Williams, D., Balaji, V., Cinquini, L., Denvil, S., Duffy, D., Evans, B.,
Ferraro, R., Hansen, R., Lautenschlager, M., and Trenham, C.: A Global Repository for
Planet-Sized Experiments and Observations, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 97, 803–816,
https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-15-00132.1, 2016.
WorldBank: Climate change and fiscal policy: A report for APECRep.,
Washington, D.C., 2011.
Short summary
This paper provides an update to an international research activity whose objective is to facilitate access to satellite and other types of regional and global datasets for evaluating global models used to produce 21st century climate projections.
This paper provides an update to an international research activity whose objective is to...
