Articles | Volume 16, issue 11
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-3241-2023
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-3241-2023
Development and technical paper
 | 
09 Jun 2023
Development and technical paper |  | 09 Jun 2023

Implementation of a machine-learned gas optics parameterization in the ECMWF Integrated Forecasting System: RRTMGP-NN 2.0

Peter Ukkonen and Robin J. Hogan

Related authors

Radiative closure assessment of retrieved cloud and aerosol properties for the EarthCARE mission: the ACMB-DF product
Howard W. Barker, Jason N. S. Cole, Najda Villefranque, Zhipeng Qu, Almudena Velázquez Blázquez, Carlos Domenech, Shannon L. Mason, and Robin J. Hogan
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 18, 3095–3107, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-18-3095-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-18-3095-2025, 2025
Short summary
Inclusion of the ECMWF ecRad radiation scheme (v1.5.0) in the MAR (v3.14), regional evaluation for Belgium, and assessment of surface shortwave spectral fluxes at Uccle
Jean-François Grailet, Robin J. Hogan, Nicolas Ghilain, David Bolsée, Xavier Fettweis, and Marilaure Grégoire
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 1965–1988, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-1965-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-1965-2025, 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
Variation in shortwave water vapour continuum and impact on clear-sky shortwave radiative feedback
Kaah P. Menang, Stefan A. Buehler, Lukas Kluft, Robin J. Hogan, and Florian E. Roemer
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-3051,https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-3051, 2024
Short summary
Evaluating the representation of Arctic cirrus solar radiative effects in the Integrated Forecasting System with airborne measurements
Johannes Röttenbacher, André Ehrlich, Hanno Müller, Florian Ewald, Anna E. Luebke, Benjamin Kirbus, Robin J. Hogan, and Manfred Wendisch
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 24, 8085–8104, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-8085-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-8085-2024, 2024
Short summary

Related subject area

Climate and Earth system modeling
FINAM is not a model (v1.0): a new Python-based model coupling framework
Sebastian Müller, Martin Lange, Thomas Fischer, Sara König, Matthias Kelbling, Jeisson Javier Leal Rojas, and Stephan Thober
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 4483–4498, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-4483-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-4483-2025, 2025
Short summary
The Detection and Attribution Model Intercomparison Project (DAMIP v2.0) contribution to CMIP7
Nathan P. Gillett, Isla R. Simpson, Gabi Hegerl, Reto Knutti, Dann Mitchell, Aurélien Ribes, Hideo Shiogama, Dáithí Stone, Claudia Tebaldi, Piotr Wolski, Wenxia Zhang, and Vivek K. Arora
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 4399–4416, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-4399-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-4399-2025, 2025
Short summary
Enhancing winter climate simulations of the Great Lakes: insights from a new coupled lake–ice–atmosphere (CLIAv1) system on the importance of integrating 3D hydrodynamics with a regional climate model
Pengfei Xue, Chenfu Huang, Yafang Zhong, Michael Notaro, Miraj B. Kayastha, Xing Zhou, Chuyan Zhao, Christa Peters-Lidard, Carlos Cruz, and Eric Kemp
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 4293–4316, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-4293-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-4293-2025, 2025
Short summary
Modelling emission and transport of key components of primary marine organic aerosol using the global aerosol–climate model ECHAM6.3–HAM2.3
Anisbel Leon-Marcos, Moritz Zeising, Manuela van Pinxteren, Sebastian Zeppenfeld, Astrid Bracher, Elena Barbaro, Anja Engel, Matteo Feltracco, Ina Tegen, and Bernd Heinold
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 4183–4213, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-4183-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-4183-2025, 2025
Short summary
Assessing the climate impact of an improved volcanic sulfate aerosol representation in E3SM
Ziming Ke, Qi Tang, Jean-Christophe Golaz, Xiaohong Liu, and Hailong Wang
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 4137–4153, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-4137-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-4137-2025, 2025
Short summary

Cited articles

Bradbury, J., Frostig, R., Hawkins, P., Johnson, M. J., Leary, C., Maclaurin, D., Necula, G., Paszke, A., VanderPlas, J., Wanderman-Milne, S., and Zhang, Q.: JAX: composable transformations of Python+NumPy programs, http://github.com/google/jax (last access: 8 June 2023), 2018. a
Brenowitz, N. D. and Bretherton, C. S.: Prognostic validation of a neural network unified physics parameterization, Geophys. Res. Lett., 45, 6289–6298, https://doi.org/10.1029/2018gl078510, 2018. a
Brenowitz, N. D., Beucler, T., Pritchard, M., and Bretherton, C. S.: Interpreting and stabilizing machine-learning parametrizations of convection, J. Atmos. Sci., 77, 4357–4375, 2020. a
Chevallier, F., Chéruy, F., Scott, N., and Chédin, A.: A neural network approach for a fast and accurate computation of a longwave radiative budget, J. Appl. Meteorol., 37, 1385–1397, 1998. a
Cotronei, A. and Slawig, T.: Single-precision arithmetic in ECHAM radiation reduces runtime and energy consumption, Geosci. Model Dev., 13, 2783–2804, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-2783-2020, 2020. a, b
Download
Short summary
Climate and weather models suffer from uncertainties resulting from approximated processes. Solar and thermal radiation is one example, as it is computationally too costly to simulate precisely. This has led to attempts to replace radiation codes based on physical equations with neural networks (NNs) that are faster but uncertain. In this paper we use global weather simulations to demonstrate that a middle-ground approach of using NNs only to predict optical properties is accurate and reliable.
Share