Articles | Volume 14, issue 5
Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 2867–2897, 2021
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-2867-2021
Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 2867–2897, 2021
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-2867-2021
Model evaluation paper
20 May 2021
Model evaluation paper | 20 May 2021

The Community Multiscale Air Quality (CMAQ) model versions 5.3 and 5.3.1: system updates and evaluation

K. Wyat Appel et al.

Related authors

Long-term Regional Trends of Nitrogen and Sulfur Deposition in the United States from 2002 to 2017
Sarah E. Benish, Jesse O. Bash, Kristen M. Foley, K. Wyat Appel, Christian Hogrefe, Robert Gilliam, and George Pouliot
Atmos. Chem. Phys. Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-2022-201,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-2022-201, 2022
Revised manuscript accepted for ACP
Short summary
The Detailed Emissions Scaling, Isolation, and Diagnostic (DESID) module in the Community Multiscale Air Quality (CMAQ) modeling system version 5.3.2
Benjamin N. Murphy, Christopher G. Nolte, Fahim Sidi, Jesse O. Bash, K. Wyat Appel, Carey Jang, Daiwen Kang, James Kelly, Rohit Mathur, Sergey Napelenok, George Pouliot, and Havala O. T. Pye
Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 3407–3420, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-3407-2021,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-3407-2021, 2021
Short summary
Particle dry deposition algorithms in CMAQ version 5.3: characterization of critical parameters and land use dependence using DepoBoxTool version 1.0
Qian Shu, Benjamin Murphy, Jonathan E. Pleim, Donna Schwede, Barron H. Henderson, Havala O.T. Pye, Keith Wyat Appel, Tanvir R. Khan, and Judith A. Perlinger
Geosci. Model Dev. Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-2021-129,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-2021-129, 2021
Preprint withdrawn
Short summary
Assessment of NO2 observations during DISCOVER-AQ and KORUS-AQ field campaigns
Sungyeon Choi, Lok N. Lamsal, Melanie Follette-Cook, Joanna Joiner, Nickolay A. Krotkov, William H. Swartz, Kenneth E. Pickering, Christopher P. Loughner, Wyat Appel, Gabriele Pfister, Pablo E. Saide, Ronald C. Cohen, Andrew J. Weinheimer, and Jay R. Herman
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 13, 2523–2546, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-13-2523-2020,https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-13-2523-2020, 2020
Constraining chemical transport PM2.5 modeling outputs using surface monitor measurements and satellite retrievals: application over the San Joaquin Valley
Mariel D. Friberg, Ralph A. Kahn, James A. Limbacher, K. Wyat Appel, and James A. Mulholland
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 18, 12891–12913, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-12891-2018,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-12891-2018, 2018
Short summary

Related subject area

Atmospheric sciences
MultilayerPy (v1.0): a Python-based framework for building, running and optimising kinetic multi-layer models of aerosols and films
Adam Milsom, Amy Lees, Adam M. Squires, and Christian Pfrang
Geosci. Model Dev., 15, 7139–7151, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-7139-2022,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-7139-2022, 2022
Short summary
Introduction of the DISAMAR radiative transfer model: determining instrument specifications and analysing methods for atmospheric retrieval (version 4.1.5)
Johan F. de Haan, Ping Wang, Maarten Sneep, J. Pepijn Veefkind, and Piet Stammes
Geosci. Model Dev., 15, 7031–7050, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-7031-2022,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-7031-2022, 2022
Short summary
Assessment of the data assimilation framework for the Rapid Refresh Forecast System v0.1 and impacts on forecasts of a convective storm case study
Ivette H. Banos, Will D. Mayfield, Guoqing Ge, Luiz F. Sapucci, Jacob R. Carley, and Louisa Nance
Geosci. Model Dev., 15, 6891–6917, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-6891-2022,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-6891-2022, 2022
Short summary
Downscaling atmospheric chemistry simulations with physically consistent deep learning
Andrew Geiss, Sam J. Silva, and Joseph C. Hardin
Geosci. Model Dev., 15, 6677–6694, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-6677-2022,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-6677-2022, 2022
Short summary
A machine learning methodology for the generation of a parameterization of the hydroxyl radical
Daniel C. Anderson, Melanie B. Follette-Cook, Sarah A. Strode, Julie M. Nicely, Junhua Liu, Peter D. Ivatt, and Bryan N. Duncan
Geosci. Model Dev., 15, 6341–6358, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-6341-2022,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-6341-2022, 2022
Short summary

Cited articles

Appel, K. W., Gilliam, R. C., Davis, N., Zubrow, A., and Howard, S. C.: Overview of the Atmospheric Model Evaluation Tool (AMET) v1.1 for evaluating meteorological and air quality models, Environ. Modell. Softw., 26, 434–443, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsoft.2010.09.007, 2011. 
Bachmann, J. D.: Will the Circle Be Unbroken: A History of the U.S. National Ambient Air Quality Standards, J. Air Waste Manage., 57, 652–697, 2007. 
Bash, J. O., Cooter, E. J., Dennis, R. L., Walker, J. T., and Pleim, J. E.: Evaluation of a regional air-quality model with bidirectional NH3 exchange coupled to an agroecosystem model, Biogeosciences, 10, 1635–1645, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-10-1635-2013, 2013. 
Byun, D. and Schere, K. L.: Review of the governing equations, computational algorithms, and other components of the Models-3 Community Multiscale Air Quality (CMAQ) modeling system, Appl. Mech. Rev., 59, 51–77, 2006. 
Download
Short summary
This paper details the scientific updates in the recently released CMAQ version 5.3 (and v5.3.1) and also includes operational and diagnostic evaluations of CMAQv5.3.1 against observations and the previous version of the CMAQ (v5.2.1). This work was done to improve the underlying science in CMAQ. This article is used to inform the CMAQ modeling community of the updates to the modeling system and the expected change in model performance from these updates (versus the previous model version).