Articles | Volume 15, issue 8
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-3183-2022
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-3183-2022
Methods for assessment of models
 | 
19 Apr 2022
Methods for assessment of models |  | 19 Apr 2022

An ensemble-based statistical methodology to detect differences in weather and climate model executables

Christian Zeman and Christoph Schär

Related authors

Reduced floating-point precision in regional climate simulations: an ensemble-based statistical verification
Hugo Banderier, Christian Zeman, David Leutwyler, Stefan Rüdisühli, and Christoph Schär
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 5573–5586, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-5573-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-5573-2024, 2024
Short summary
Vortex streets to the lee of Madeira in a kilometre-resolution regional climate model
Qinggang Gao, Christian Zeman, Jesus Vergara-Temprado, Daniela C. A. Lima, Peter Molnar, and Christoph Schär
Weather Clim. Dynam., 4, 189–211, https://doi.org/10.5194/wcd-4-189-2023,https://doi.org/10.5194/wcd-4-189-2023, 2023
Short summary
Model intercomparison of COSMO 5.0 and IFS 45r1 at kilometer-scale grid spacing
Christian Zeman, Nils P. Wedi, Peter D. Dueben, Nikolina Ban, and Christoph Schär
Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 4617–4639, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-4617-2021,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-4617-2021, 2021
Short summary

Related subject area

Atmospheric sciences
Exploring a high-level programming model for the NWP domain using ECMWF microphysics schemes
Stefano Ubbiali, Christian Kühnlein, Christoph Schär, Linda Schlemmer, Thomas C. Schulthess, Michael Staneker, and Heini Wernli
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 529–546, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-529-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-529-2025, 2025
Short summary
Quantifying uncertainties in satellite NO2 superobservations for data assimilation and model evaluation
Pieter Rijsdijk, Henk Eskes, Arlene Dingemans, K. Folkert Boersma, Takashi Sekiya, Kazuyuki Miyazaki, and Sander Houweling
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 483–509, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-483-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-483-2025, 2025
Short summary
ML-AMPSIT: Machine Learning-based Automated Multi-method Parameter Sensitivity and Importance analysis Tool
Dario Di Santo, Cenlin He, Fei Chen, and Lorenzo Giovannini
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 433–459, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-433-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-433-2025, 2025
Short summary
Coupling the urban canopy model TEB (SURFEXv9.0) with the radiation model SPARTACUS-Urbanv0.6.1 for more realistic urban radiative exchange calculation
Robert Schoetter, Robin James Hogan, Cyril Caliot, and Valéry Masson
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 405–431, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-405-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-405-2025, 2025
Short summary
Forecasting contrail climate forcing for flight planning and air traffic management applications: the CocipGrid model in pycontrails 0.51.0
Zebediah Engberg, Roger Teoh, Tristan Abbott, Thomas Dean, Marc E. J. Stettler, and Marc L. Shapiro
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 253–286, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-253-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-253-2025, 2025
Short summary

Cited articles

Baker, A. H., Hammerling, D. M., Levy, M. N., Xu, H., Dennis, J. M., Eaton, B. E., Edwards, J., Hannay, C., Mickelson, S. A., Neale, R. B., Nychka, D., Shollenberger, J., Tribbia, J., Vertenstein, M., and Williamson, D.: A new ensemble-based consistency test for the Community Earth System Model (pyCECT v1.0), Geosci. Model Dev., 8, 2829–2840, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-8-2829-2015, 2015. a, b, c, d, e, f, g, h, i, j
Baker, A. H., Hu, Y., Hammerling, D. M., Tseng, Y.-H., Xu, H., Huang, X., Bryan, F. O., and Yang, G.: Evaluating statistical consistency in the ocean model component of the Community Earth System Model (pyCECT v2.0), Geosci. Model Dev., 9, 2391–2406, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-2391-2016, 2016. a, b, c, d
Baldauf, M., Seifert, A., Förstner, J., Majewski, D., Raschendorfer, M., and Reinhardt, T.: Operational Convective-Scale Numerical Weather Prediction with the COSMO Model: Description and Sensitivities, Mon. Weather Rev., 139, 3887–3905, https://doi.org/10.1175/MWR-D-10-05013.1, 2011. a
Bartlett, M. S.: The Effect of Non-Normality on the t Distribution, Math. Proc. Cambridge, 31, 223–231, https://doi.org/10.1017/S0305004100013311, 1935. a
Bauer, P., Thorpe, A., and Brunet, G.: The quiet revolution of numerical weather prediction, Nature, 525, 47–55, https://doi.org/10.1038/nature14956, 2015. a
Download
Short summary
Our atmosphere is a chaotic system, where even a tiny change can have a big impact. This makes it difficult to assess if small changes, such as the move to a new hardware architecture, will significantly affect a weather and climate model. We present a methodology that allows to objectively verify this. The methodology is applied to several test cases, showing a high sensitivity. Results also show that a major system update of the underlying supercomputer did not significantly affect our model.