Articles | Volume 8, issue 9
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-8-2841-2015
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-8-2841-2015
Model experiment description paper
 | 
09 Sep 2015
Model experiment description paper |  | 09 Sep 2015

The GRENE-TEA model intercomparison project (GTMIP): overview and experiment protocol for Stage 1

S. Miyazaki, K. Saito, J. Mori, T. Yamazaki, T. Ise, H. Arakida, T. Hajima, Y. Iijima, H. Machiya, T. Sueyoshi, H. Yabuki, E. J. Burke, M. Hosaka, K. Ichii, H. Ikawa, A. Ito, A. Kotani, Y. Matsuura, M. Niwano, T. Nitta, R. O'ishi, T. Ohta, H. Park, T. Sasai, A. Sato, H. Sato, A. Sugimoto, R. Suzuki, K. Tanaka, S. Yamaguchi, and K. Yoshimura

Related authors

The GRENE-TEA model intercomparison project (GTMIP) Stage 1 forcing data set
T. Sueyoshi, K. Saito, S. Miyazaki, J. Mori, T. Ise, H. Arakida, R. Suzuki, A. Sato, Y. Iijima, H. Yabuki, H. Ikawa, T. Ohta, A. Kotani, T. Hajima, H. Sato, T. Yamazaki, and A. Sugimoto
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 8, 1–14, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-8-1-2016,https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-8-1-2016, 2016
Short summary

Related subject area

Climate and Earth system modeling
CARIB12: a regional Community Earth System Model/Modular Ocean Model 6 configuration of the Caribbean Sea
Giovanni Seijo-Ellis, Donata Giglio, Gustavo Marques, and Frank Bryan
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 8989–9021, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8989-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8989-2024, 2024
Short summary
Architectural insights into and training methodology optimization of Pangu-Weather
Deifilia To, Julian Quinting, Gholam Ali Hoshyaripour, Markus Götz, Achim Streit, and Charlotte Debus
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 8873–8884, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8873-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8873-2024, 2024
Short summary
Evaluation of global fire simulations in CMIP6 Earth system models
Fang Li, Xiang Song, Sandy P. Harrison, Jennifer R. Marlon, Zhongda Lin, L. Ruby Leung, Jörg Schwinger, Virginie Marécal, Shiyu Wang, Daniel S. Ward, Xiao Dong, Hanna Lee, Lars Nieradzik, Sam S. Rabin, and Roland Séférian
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 8751–8771, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8751-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8751-2024, 2024
Short summary
Evaluating downscaled products with expected hydroclimatic co-variances
Seung H. Baek, Paul A. Ullrich, Bo Dong, and Jiwoo Lee
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 8665–8681, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8665-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8665-2024, 2024
Short summary
Software sustainability of global impact models
Emmanuel Nyenah, Petra Döll, Daniel S. Katz, and Robert Reinecke
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 8593–8611, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8593-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8593-2024, 2024
Short summary

Cited articles

Abramowitz, G., Leuning, R., Clark, M., and Pitman, A.: Evaluating the performance of land surface models, J. Climate, 21, 5468–5481, 2008.
Adler, R. F., Huffman, G. J., Chang, A., Ferraro, R., Chang, A., Ferraro, R., Xie, P. P., Janowiak, J., Rudolf, B., Scheneider, U., Curtis, S., Bolvin, D., Gruber, A., Susskind, J., Arkin, P., and Nelkin, E.: The Version-2 Global Precipitation Climatology Project (GPCP) Monthly Precipitation Analysis (1979–Present), J. Hydrometeorol., 4, 1147–1167, 2003.
Ahlstrom, A., Schurgers, G., Arneth, A., and Smith, B.: Robustness and uncertainty in terrestrial ecosystem carbon response to CMIP5 climate change projections, Environ. Res. Lett., 7, 044008, https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/7/4/044008, 2012.
Anav, A., Friedlingstein, P., Kidston, M., Bopp, L., Ciais, P., Cox, P., Jones, C., Jung, M., Myneni, R., and Zhu, Z.: Evaluating the land and ocean components of the global carbon cycle in the CMIP5 Earth system models, J. Climate, 26, 6801–6843, 2013.
Short summary
The paper provides an overall outlook and the Stage 1 experiment (site simulations) protocol of GTMIP, an open model intercomparison project for terrestrial Arctic, conducted as an activity of the Japan-funded Arctic Climate Change Research Project (GRENE-TEA). Models are driven by 34-year data created with the GRENE-TEA observations at four sites in Finland, Siberia and Alaska, and evaluated for physico-ecological key processes: energy budgets, snow, permafrost, phenology, and carbon budget.