Articles | Volume 9, issue 9
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-3093-2016
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-3093-2016
Methods for assessment of models
 | 
06 Sep 2016
Methods for assessment of models |  | 06 Sep 2016

Community Intercomparison Suite (CIS) v1.4.0: a tool for intercomparing models and observations

Duncan Watson-Parris, Nick Schutgens, Nicholas Cook, Zak Kipling, Philip Kershaw, Edward Gryspeerdt, Bryan Lawrence, and Philip Stier

Related authors

Towards an improved understanding of the impact of clouds and precipitation on the representation of aerosols over the Boreal Forest in GCMs
Sini Talvinen, Paul Kim, Emanuele Tovazzi, Eemeli Holopainen, Roxana Cremer, Thomas Kühn, Harri Kokkola, Zak Kipling, David Neubauer, João C. Teixeira, Alistair Sellar, Duncan Watson-Parris, Yang Yang, Jialei Zhu, Srinath Krishnan, Annele Virtanen, and Daniel G. Partridge
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-721,https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-721, 2025
This preprint is open for discussion and under review for Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics (ACP).
Short summary
How well are aerosol–cloud interactions represented in climate models? – Part 2: Isolating the aerosol impact on clouds following the 2014–15 Holuhraun eruption
George Jordan, Florent Malavelle, Jim Haywood, Ying Chen, Ben Johnson, Daniel Partridge, Amy Peace, Eliza Duncan, Duncan Watson-Parris, David Neubauer, Anton Laakso, Martine Michou, and Pierre Nabat
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-835,https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-835, 2025
This preprint is open for discussion and under review for Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics (ACP).
Short summary
Opinion: Why all emergent constraints are wrong but some are useful – a machine learning perspective
Peer Nowack and Duncan Watson-Parris
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 25, 2365–2384, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-25-2365-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-25-2365-2025, 2025
Short summary
Biomass burning emission analysis based on MODIS aerosol optical depth and AeroCom multi-model simulations: implications for model constraints and emission inventories
Mariya Petrenko, Ralph Kahn, Mian Chin, Susanne E. Bauer, Tommi Bergman, Huisheng Bian, Gabriele Curci, Ben Johnson, Johannes W. Kaiser, Zak Kipling, Harri Kokkola, Xiaohong Liu, Keren Mezuman, Tero Mielonen, Gunnar Myhre, Xiaohua Pan, Anna Protonotariou, Samuel Remy, Ragnhild Bieltvedt Skeie, Philip Stier, Toshihiko Takemura, Kostas Tsigaridis, Hailong Wang, Duncan Watson-Parris, and Kai Zhang
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 25, 1545–1567, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-25-1545-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-25-1545-2025, 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

Related subject area

Earth and space science informatics
Moving beyond post hoc explainable artificial intelligence: a perspective paper on lessons learned from dynamical climate modeling
Ryan J. O'Loughlin, Dan Li, Richard Neale, and Travis A. O'Brien
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 787–802, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-787-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-787-2025, 2025
Short summary
Remote-sensing-based forest canopy height mapping: some models are useful, but might they provide us with even more insights when combined?
Nikola Besic, Nicolas Picard, Cédric Vega, Jean-Daniel Bontemps, Lionel Hertzog, Jean-Pierre Renaud, Fajwel Fogel, Martin Schwartz, Agnès Pellissier-Tanon, Gabriel Destouet, Frédéric Mortier, Milena Planells-Rodriguez, and Philippe Ciais
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 337–359, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-337-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-337-2025, 2025
Short summary
Checking the consistency of 3D geological models
Marion N. Parquer, Eric A. de Kemp, Boyan Brodaric, and Michael J. Hillier
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 71–100, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-71-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-71-2025, 2025
Short summary
The effect of lossy compression of numerical weather prediction data on data analysis: a case study using enstools-compression 2023.11
Oriol Tintó Prims, Robert Redl, Marc Rautenhaus, Tobias Selz, Takumi Matsunobu, Kameswar Rao Modali, and George Craig
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 8909–8925, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8909-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8909-2024, 2024
Short summary
GNNWR: an open-source package of spatiotemporal intelligent regression methods for modeling spatial and temporal nonstationarity
Ziyu Yin, Jiale Ding, Yi Liu, Ruoxu Wang, Yige Wang, Yijun Chen, Jin Qi, Sensen Wu, and Zhenhong Du
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 8455–8468, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8455-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8455-2024, 2024
Short summary

Cited articles

Beck, K.: Extreme Programming Explained: Embrace Change, An Alan R. Apt Book Series, Addison-Wesley, Boston, Massachusetts, 2000.
Beck, K.: Test-Driven Development by Example, Addison-Wesley, Boston, Massachusetts, 2003.
Bentley, J. L.: Multidimensional Binary Search Trees Used for Associative Searching, Commun. ACM, 18, 509–517, 1975.
Boucher, O., Randall, D., Artaxo, P., Bretherton, C., Feingold, G., Forster, P., Kerminen, V. M., Kondo, Y., Liao, H., Lohmann, U., Rasch, P., Satheesh, S. K., Sherwood, S., Stevens, B., and Zhang, X. Y.: Clouds and Aerosols, in: Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, edited by: Stocker, T. F., Qin, D., Plattner, G. K., Tignor, M., Allen, S. K., Boschung, J., Nauels, A., Xia, Y., Bex, V., and Midgley, P. M., pp. 571–658, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA, 2013.
Eyring, V., Bony, S., Meehl, G. A., Senior, C. A., Stevens, B., Stouffer, R. J., and Taylor, K. E.: Overview of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6) experimental design and organization, Geosci. Model Dev., 9, 1937–1958, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-1937-2016, 2016a.
Download
Short summary
In this paper we describe CIS, a new command line tool for the easy visualization, analysis and comparison of a wide variety of gridded and ungridded data sets used in Earth sciences. Users can now use a single tool to not only view plots of satellite, aircraft, station or model data, but also bring them onto the same spatio-temporal sampling. This allows robust, quantitative comparisons to be made easily. CIS is an open-source project and welcomes input from the community.
Share