Articles | Volume 16, issue 16
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-4639-2023
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-4639-2023
Methods for assessment of models
 | 
18 Aug 2023
Methods for assessment of models |  | 18 Aug 2023

Using Probability Density Functions to Evaluate Models (PDFEM, v1.0) to compare a biogeochemical model with satellite-derived chlorophyll

Bror F. Jönsson, Christopher L. Follett, Jacob Bien, Stephanie Dutkiewicz, Sangwon Hyun, Gemma Kulk, Gael L. Forget, Christian Müller, Marie-Fanny Racault, Christopher N. Hill, Thomas Jackson, and Shubha Sathyendranath

Data sets

Code and data examples Bror F. Jönsson https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6683849

Model code and software

ESA Ocean Colour Climate Change Initiative (Ocean_Colour_cci): Version 4.2 Data S. Sathyendranath, T. Jackson, C. Brockmann, et al. https://doi.org/10.5285/D62F7F801CB54C749D20E736D4A1039F

Climate Change Simulation output files (1995-2100) S. Dutkiewicz https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/08OJUV

Download
Short summary
While biogeochemical models and satellite-derived ocean color data provide unprecedented information, it is problematic to compare them. Here, we present a new approach based on comparing probability density distributions of model and satellite properties to assess model skills. We also introduce Earth mover's distances as a novel and powerful metric to quantify the misfit between models and observations. We find that how 3D chlorophyll fields are aggregated can be a significant source of error.