Articles | Volume 13, issue 12
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-6467-2020
© 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-13-6467-2020
© Author(s) 2020. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
A framework to evaluate IMEX schemes for atmospheric models
Sandia Natl. Laboratories, P.O. Box 5800, MS 1321, Albuquerque, NM, USA
Mark A. Taylor
Sandia Natl. Laboratories, P.O. Box 5800, MS 1321, Albuquerque, NM, USA
Andrew M. Bradley
Sandia Natl. Laboratories, P.O. Box 5800, MS 1321, Albuquerque, NM, USA
Peter A. Bosler
Sandia Natl. Laboratories, P.O. Box 5800, MS 1321, Albuquerque, NM, USA
Andrew Steyer
Sandia Natl. Laboratories, P.O. Box 5800, MS 1321, Albuquerque, NM, USA
Related authors
Oksana Guba, Arjun Sharma, Mark A. Taylor, Peter A. Bosler, and Erika L. Roesler
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-3966, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-3966, 2025
This preprint is open for discussion and under review for Geoscientific Model Development (GMD).
Short summary
Short summary
It is important for computational Earth system models to capture interactions between the ocean and the atmosphere accurately. Because of incredible complexity of these interactions, computational models contain simplifications, which may hinder the models' capabilities. Here we focus on detailed analysis of thermodynamic interactions between the ocean and the atmosphere in computational Earth system models. We also provide a framework to show how modeling these interactions can be improved.
Naser Mahfouz, Hassan Beydoun, Johannes Mülmenstädt, Noel Keen, Adam C. Varble, Luca Bertagna, Peter Bogenschutz, Andrew Bradley, Matthew W. Christensen, T. Conrad Clevenger, Aaron Donahue, Jerome Fast, James Foucar, Jean-Christophe Golaz, Oksana Guba, Walter Hannah, Benjamin Hillman, Robert Jacob, Wuyin Lin, Po-Lun Ma, Yun Qian, Balwinder Singh, Christopher Terai, Hailong Wang, Mingxuan Wu, Kai Zhang, Andrew Gettelman, Mark Taylor, L. Ruby Leung, Peter Caldwell, and Susannah Burrows
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1868, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1868, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Our study assesses the aerosol effective radiative forcing in a global cloud-resolving atmosphere model at ultra-high resolution. We demonstrate that global ERFaer signal can be robustly reproduced across resolutions when aerosol activation processes are carefully parameterized. Further, we argue that simplified prescribed aerosol schemes will open the door for further process/mechanism studies under controlled conditions.
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.
Qi Tang, Jean-Christophe Golaz, Luke P. Van Roekel, Mark A. Taylor, Wuyin Lin, Benjamin R. Hillman, Paul A. Ullrich, Andrew M. Bradley, Oksana Guba, Jonathan D. Wolfe, Tian Zhou, Kai Zhang, Xue Zheng, Yunyan Zhang, Meng Zhang, Mingxuan Wu, Hailong Wang, Cheng Tao, Balwinder Singh, Alan M. Rhoades, Yi Qin, Hong-Yi Li, Yan Feng, Yuying Zhang, Chengzhu Zhang, Charles S. Zender, Shaocheng Xie, Erika L. Roesler, Andrew F. Roberts, Azamat Mametjanov, Mathew E. Maltrud, Noel D. Keen, Robert L. Jacob, Christiane Jablonowski, Owen K. Hughes, Ryan M. Forsyth, Alan V. Di Vittorio, Peter M. Caldwell, Gautam Bisht, Renata B. McCoy, L. Ruby Leung, and David C. Bader
Geosci. Model Dev., 16, 3953–3995, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-3953-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-3953-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
High-resolution simulations are superior to low-resolution ones in capturing regional climate changes and climate extremes. However, uniformly reducing the grid size of a global Earth system model is too computationally expensive. We provide an overview of the fully coupled regionally refined model (RRM) of E3SMv2 and document a first-of-its-kind set of climate production simulations using RRM at an economic cost. The key to this success is our innovative hybrid time step method.
Andrew M. Bradley, Peter A. Bosler, and Oksana Guba
Geosci. Model Dev., 15, 6285–6310, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-6285-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-6285-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
Tracer transport in atmosphere models can be computationally expensive. We describe a flexible and efficient interpolation semi-Lagrangian method, the Islet method. It permits using up to three grids that share an element grid: a dynamics grid for computing quantities such as the wind velocity; a physics parameterizations grid; and a tracer grid. The Islet method performs well on a number of verification problems and achieves high performance in the E3SM Atmosphere Model version 2.
Oksana Guba, Arjun Sharma, Mark A. Taylor, Peter A. Bosler, and Erika L. Roesler
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-3966, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-3966, 2025
This preprint is open for discussion and under review for Geoscientific Model Development (GMD).
Short summary
Short summary
It is important for computational Earth system models to capture interactions between the ocean and the atmosphere accurately. Because of incredible complexity of these interactions, computational models contain simplifications, which may hinder the models' capabilities. Here we focus on detailed analysis of thermodynamic interactions between the ocean and the atmosphere in computational Earth system models. We also provide a framework to show how modeling these interactions can be improved.
Jishi Zhang, Peter Bogenschutz, Mark Taylor, and Philip Cameron-Smith
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-2223, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-2223, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
We pushed a global cloud-resolving model to a novel 100 m resolution setup over the San Francisco Bay Area using a regionally refined mesh. The model captured fine-scale air motions over complex terrain and coastal regions at large-eddy scales with fully comprehensive global modeling configuration, enabled by scale-aware turbulence parameterization. Performance tests demonstrated that GPU acceleration can make such high-resolution simulations feasible within practical timeframes.
Naser Mahfouz, Hassan Beydoun, Johannes Mülmenstädt, Noel Keen, Adam C. Varble, Luca Bertagna, Peter Bogenschutz, Andrew Bradley, Matthew W. Christensen, T. Conrad Clevenger, Aaron Donahue, Jerome Fast, James Foucar, Jean-Christophe Golaz, Oksana Guba, Walter Hannah, Benjamin Hillman, Robert Jacob, Wuyin Lin, Po-Lun Ma, Yun Qian, Balwinder Singh, Christopher Terai, Hailong Wang, Mingxuan Wu, Kai Zhang, Andrew Gettelman, Mark Taylor, L. Ruby Leung, Peter Caldwell, and Susannah Burrows
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1868, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1868, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Our study assesses the aerosol effective radiative forcing in a global cloud-resolving atmosphere model at ultra-high resolution. We demonstrate that global ERFaer signal can be robustly reproduced across resolutions when aerosol activation processes are carefully parameterized. Further, we argue that simplified prescribed aerosol schemes will open the door for further process/mechanism studies under controlled conditions.
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.
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.
Qi Tang, Jean-Christophe Golaz, Luke P. Van Roekel, Mark A. Taylor, Wuyin Lin, Benjamin R. Hillman, Paul A. Ullrich, Andrew M. Bradley, Oksana Guba, Jonathan D. Wolfe, Tian Zhou, Kai Zhang, Xue Zheng, Yunyan Zhang, Meng Zhang, Mingxuan Wu, Hailong Wang, Cheng Tao, Balwinder Singh, Alan M. Rhoades, Yi Qin, Hong-Yi Li, Yan Feng, Yuying Zhang, Chengzhu Zhang, Charles S. Zender, Shaocheng Xie, Erika L. Roesler, Andrew F. Roberts, Azamat Mametjanov, Mathew E. Maltrud, Noel D. Keen, Robert L. Jacob, Christiane Jablonowski, Owen K. Hughes, Ryan M. Forsyth, Alan V. Di Vittorio, Peter M. Caldwell, Gautam Bisht, Renata B. McCoy, L. Ruby Leung, and David C. Bader
Geosci. Model Dev., 16, 3953–3995, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-3953-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-3953-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
High-resolution simulations are superior to low-resolution ones in capturing regional climate changes and climate extremes. However, uniformly reducing the grid size of a global Earth system model is too computationally expensive. We provide an overview of the fully coupled regionally refined model (RRM) of E3SMv2 and document a first-of-its-kind set of climate production simulations using RRM at an economic cost. The key to this success is our innovative hybrid time step method.
Andrew M. Bradley, Peter A. Bosler, and Oksana Guba
Geosci. Model Dev., 15, 6285–6310, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-6285-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-6285-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
Tracer transport in atmosphere models can be computationally expensive. We describe a flexible and efficient interpolation semi-Lagrangian method, the Islet method. It permits using up to three grids that share an element grid: a dynamics grid for computing quantities such as the wind velocity; a physics parameterizations grid; and a tracer grid. The Islet method performs well on a number of verification problems and achieves high performance in the E3SM Atmosphere Model version 2.
Po-Lun Ma, Bryce E. Harrop, Vincent E. Larson, Richard B. Neale, Andrew Gettelman, Hugh Morrison, Hailong Wang, Kai Zhang, Stephen A. Klein, Mark D. Zelinka, Yuying Zhang, Yun Qian, Jin-Ho Yoon, Christopher R. Jones, Meng Huang, Sheng-Lun Tai, Balwinder Singh, Peter A. Bogenschutz, Xue Zheng, Wuyin Lin, Johannes Quaas, Hélène Chepfer, Michael A. Brunke, Xubin Zeng, Johannes Mülmenstädt, Samson Hagos, Zhibo Zhang, Hua Song, Xiaohong Liu, Michael S. Pritchard, Hui Wan, Jingyu Wang, Qi Tang, Peter M. Caldwell, Jiwen Fan, Larry K. Berg, Jerome D. Fast, Mark A. Taylor, Jean-Christophe Golaz, Shaocheng Xie, Philip J. Rasch, and L. Ruby Leung
Geosci. Model Dev., 15, 2881–2916, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-2881-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-2881-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
An alternative set of parameters for E3SM Atmospheric Model version 1 has been developed based on a tuning strategy that focuses on clouds. When clouds in every regime are improved, other aspects of the model are also improved, even though they are not the direct targets for calibration. The recalibrated model shows a lower sensitivity to anthropogenic aerosols and surface warming, suggesting potential improvements to the simulated climate in the past and future.
Cited articles
Dennis, J., Edwards, J., Evans, K., Guba, O., Lauritzen, P., Mirin, A., St-Cyr,
A., Taylor, M. A., and Worley, P. H.: CAM-SE: A scalable spectral element
dynamical core for the Community Atmosphere Model, Int. J. High Perf. Comput.
Appl., 26, 74–89, 2012. a
Giraldo, F., Kelly, J., and Constantinescu, E.: Implicit-Explicit Formulations
of a Three-Dimensional Nonhydrostatic Unified Model of the Atmosphere
(NUMA), SIAM J. Sci. Comput., 35, B1162–B1194, https://doi.org/10.1137/120876034,
2013. a, b, c, d
Guba, O. and Steyer, A.: E3SM-Project/sta-imex: v1.0.5 (Version v1.0.5),
Zenodo, https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3785712 (last access: 9 October 2020), 2020. a, b, c, d
Kinnmark, I. and Gray, W.: One step integration methods with maximum
stability regions, Math. Comput. Simulat., XXVI, 84–92,
https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-4754(84)90039-9, 1984a. a, b, c
Kinnmark, I. and Gray, W.: One step integration methods with third-fourth
order accuracy with large hyperbolic stability limits, Math. Comput.
Simulat., XXVI, 181–188, https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-4754(84)90056-9,
1984b. a, b
Laprise, R.: The Euler equations of motion with hydrostatic pressure as an
independent variable, Mon. Weather Rev., 120, 197–207, 1992. a
Lin, S.-J.: A Vertically Lagrangian Finite-Volume Dynamical Core for Global
Models, Mon. Weather Rev., 132, 2293–2397, 2004. a
Munkres, J.: Algorithms for the Assignment and Transportation Problems, J. Soc. Ind. Appl. Math., 5, 32–38, 1957. a
Rasch, P. J., Xie, S., Ma, P.-L., Lin, W., Wang, H., Tang, Q., Burrows, S. M.,
Caldwell, P., Zhang, K., Easter, R. C., Cameron-Smith, P., Singh, B., Wan,
H., Golaz, J.-C., Harrop, B. E., Roesler, E., Bacmeister, J., Larson, V. E.,
Evans, K. J., Qian, Y., Taylor, M., Leung, L., Zhang, Y., Brent, L.,
Branstetter, M., Hannay, C., Mahajan, S., Mametjanov, A., Neale, R., Richter,
J. H., Yoon, J.-H., Zender, C. S., Bader, D., Flanner, M., Foucar, J. G.,
Jacob, R., N.Keen, Klein, S. A., Liu, X., Salinger, A. G., and Shrivastava,
M.: An Overview of the Atmospheric Component of the Energy Exascale Earth
System Model, J. Adv. Model. Earth Syst., 11, 2377–2411, https://doi.org/10.1029/2019MS001629,
2019. a
Staniforth, A., White, A., Wood, N., Thuburn, J., Zerroukat, M., Cordero, E.,
Davies, T., and Diamantakis, M.: UNIFIED MODEL DOCUMENTATION PAPER No 15,
Tech. rep., United Kingdom Met Office, Exeter, Devon,
available at: http://research.metoffice.gov.uk/research/nwp/publications/papers/unified_model/umdp15_v6.3.pdf (last access: 26 February 2017),
2006. a
Taylor, M. A., Guba, O., Steyer, A., Ullrich, P. A., Hall, D. M., and Eldrid,
C.: An Energy Consistent Discretization of the Nonhydrostatic Equations in
Primitive Variables, J. Adv. Model. Earth Syst., 12,
e2019MS001783, https://doi.org/10.1029/2019MS001783, 2020. a, b
Thuburn, J.: Some Basic Dynamics Relevant to the Design of Atmospheric Model
Dynamical Cores, in: Numerical Techniques for Global Atmospheric Models,
edited by: Lauritzen, P. H., Jablonowski, C., Taylor, M. A., and Nair, R. D.,
Springer, 2012. a
Thuburn, J., Wood, N., and Staniforth, A.: Normal modes of deep atmospheres. I:
Spherical geometry, Q. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc.,
128, 1771–1792, https://doi.org/10.1256/003590002320603403,
2002a. a, b
Thuburn, J., Wood, N., and Staniforth, A.: Normal modes of deep atmospheres.
II: f–F-plane geometry, Q. J. Roy. Meteor.
Soc., 128, 1793–1806, https://doi.org/10.1256/003590002320603412,
2002b. a, b, c