Articles | Volume 17, issue 7
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-2493-2024
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-2493-2024
Methods for assessment of models
 | 
03 Apr 2024
Methods for assessment of models |  | 03 Apr 2024

DCMIP2016: the tropical cyclone test case

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

Related authors

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
Multi-year simulations at kilometre scale with the Integrated Forecasting System coupled to FESOM2.5 and NEMOv3.4
Thomas Rackow, Xabier Pedruzo-Bagazgoitia, Tobias Becker, Sebastian Milinski, Irina Sandu, Razvan Aguridan, Peter Bechtold, Sebastian Beyer, Jean Bidlot, Souhail Boussetta, Willem Deconinck, Michail Diamantakis, Peter Dueben, Emanuel Dutra, Richard Forbes, Rohit Ghosh, Helge F. Goessling, Ioan Hadade, Jan Hegewald, Thomas Jung, Sarah Keeley, Lukas Kluft, Nikolay Koldunov, Aleksei Koldunov, Tobias Kölling, Josh Kousal, Christian Kühnlein, Pedro Maciel, Kristian Mogensen, Tiago Quintino, Inna Polichtchouk, Balthasar Reuter, Domokos Sármány, Patrick Scholz, Dmitry Sidorenko, Jan Streffing, Birgit Sützl, Daisuke Takasuka, Steffen Tietsche, Mirco Valentini, Benoît Vannière, Nils Wedi, Lorenzo Zampieri, and Florian Ziemen
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 33–69, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-33-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-33-2025, 2025
Short summary
Revealing the dynamics of a local Alpine windstorm using large-eddy simulations
Nicolai Krieger, Heini Wernli, Michael Sprenger, and Christian Kühnlein
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-3461,https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-3461, 2024
Short summary
Algorithmically detected rain-on-snow flood events in different climate datasets: a case study of the Susquehanna River basin
Colin M. Zarzycki, Benjamin D. Ascher, Alan M. Rhoades, and Rachel R. McCrary
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 24, 3315–3335, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-24-3315-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-24-3315-2024, 2024
Short summary
High Resolution Model Intercomparison Project phase 2 (HighResMIP2) towards CMIP7
Malcolm John Roberts, Kevin A. Reed, Qing Bao, Joseph J. Barsugli, Suzana J. Camargo, Louis-Philippe Caron, Ping Chang, Cheng-Ta Chen, Hannah M. Christensen, Gokhan Danabasoglu, Ivy Frenger, Neven S. Fučkar, Shabeh ul Hasson, Helene T. Hewitt, Huanping Huang, Daehyun Kim, Chihiro Kodama, Michael Lai, Lai-Yung Ruby Leung, Ryo Mizuta, Paulo Nobre, Pablo Ortega, Dominique Paquin, Christopher D. Roberts, Enrico Scoccimarro, Jon Seddon, Anne Marie Treguier, Chia-Ying Tu, Paul A. Ullrich, Pier Luigi Vidale, Michael F. Wehner, Colin M. Zarzycki, Bosong Zhang, Wei Zhang, and Ming Zhao
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-2582,https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-2582, 2024
Short summary

Related subject area

Climate and Earth system modeling
The very-high-resolution configuration of the EC-Earth global model for HighResMIP
Eduardo Moreno-Chamarro, Thomas Arsouze, Mario Acosta, Pierre-Antoine Bretonnière, Miguel Castrillo, Eric Ferrer, Amanda Frigola, Daria Kuznetsova, Eneko Martin-Martinez, Pablo Ortega, and Sergi Palomas
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 461–482, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-461-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-461-2025, 2025
Short summary
GOSI9: UK Global Ocean and Sea Ice configurations
Catherine Guiavarc'h, David Storkey, Adam T. Blaker, Ed Blockley, Alex Megann, Helene Hewitt, Michael J. Bell, Daley Calvert, Dan Copsey, Bablu Sinha, Sophia Moreton, Pierre Mathiot, and Bo An
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 377–403, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-377-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-377-2025, 2025
Short summary
Decomposition of skill scores for conditional verification: impact of Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation phases on the predictability of decadal temperature forecasts
Andy Richling, Jens Grieger, and Henning W. Rust
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 361–375, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-361-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-361-2025, 2025
Short summary
Virtual Integration of Satellite and In-situ Observation Networks (VISION) v1.0: In-Situ Observations Simulator (ISO_simulator)
Maria R. Russo, Sadie L. Bartholomew, David Hassell, Alex M. Mason, Erica Neininger, A. James Perman, David A. J. Sproson, Duncan Watson-Parris, and Nathan Luke Abraham
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 181–191, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-181-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-181-2025, 2025
Short summary
Climate model downscaling in central Asia: a dynamical and a neural network approach
Bijan Fallah, Masoud Rostami, Emmanuele Russo, Paula Harder, Christoph Menz, Peter Hoffmann, Iulii Didovets, and Fred F. Hattermann
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 161–180, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-161-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-161-2025, 2025
Short summary

Cited articles

Blackburn, M., Williamson, D. L., Nakajima, K., Ohfuchi, W., Takahashi, Y. O., Hayashi, Y.-Y., Nakamura, H., Ishiwatari, M., McGregor, J. L., Borth, H., Wirth, V., Frank, H., Bechtold, P., Wedi, N. P., Tomita, H., Satoh, M., Zhao, M., Held, I. M., Suarez, M. J., Lee, M.-I., Wantanabe, M., Kimoto, M., Liu, Y., Wang, Z., Molod, A., Rajendran, K., Kitoh, A., and Stratton, R.: The aqua-planet experiment (APE): Control SST simulation, J. Meteorol. Soc. Jpn. Ser. II, 91, 17–56, https://doi.org/10.2151/jmsj.2013-A02, 2013. a
CESM: Simpler Models, https://www.cesm.ucar.edu/models/simple, last access: 23 December 2023. a
Charney, J. G. and Phillips, N. A.: Numerical integration of the quasigeostrophic equations for barotropic and simple barolclinid flows, J. Meteorol., 10, 71–99, 1953. a
Chavas, D. R. and Lin, N.: A Model for the Complete Radial Structure of the Tropical Cyclone Wind Field. Part I: Comparison with Observed Structure, J. Atmos. Sci., 72, 3647–3662, https://doi.org/10.1175/JAS-D-15-0014.1, 2015. a, b
Chavas, D. R., Reed, K. A., and Knaff, J. A.: Physical understanding of the tropical cyclone wind-pressure relationship, Nat. Commun., 8, 1–11, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-017-01546-9, 2017. a, b
Download
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.