Articles | Volume 9, issue 10
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-3751-2016
© Author(s) 2016. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-3751-2016
© Author(s) 2016. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.
Model experiment description paper
| 
25 Oct 2016
Model experiment description paper |
| 25 Oct 2016
The Decadal Climate Prediction Project (DCPP) contribution to CMIP6
George J. Boer
CORRESPONDING AUTHOR
Canadian Centre for Climate Modelling and Analysis, Environment and
Climate Change Canada, Victoria BC, Canada
Douglas M. Smith
CORRESPONDING AUTHOR
Met Office, Hadley
Centre, Exeter, UK
Christophe Cassou
Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique
(CNRS)/CERFACS, CECI, UMR 5318 Toulouse, France
Francisco Doblas-Reyes
Institució
Catalana de Recerca i Estudis Avançats (ICREA) and Barcelona
Supercomputing Center (BSC-CNS), Barcelona, Spain
Gokhan Danabasoglu
National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR), Boulder, CO, USA
Ben Kirtman
Rosenstiel School of Marine and Atmospheric Science, University of
Miami, Miami, FL, USA
Yochanan Kushnir
Lamont
Doherty Earth Observatory, Palisades, NY, USA
Masahide Kimoto
Atmosphere and Ocean
Research Institute, University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan
Gerald A. Meehl
National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR), Boulder, CO, USA
Rym Msadek
Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique
(CNRS)/CERFACS, CECI, UMR 5318 Toulouse, France
Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory/NOAA, Princeton, NJ, USA
Wolfgang A. Mueller
Max-Planck-Institute for Meteorology, Hamburg, Germany
Karl E. Taylor
Program for Climate Model Diagnosis and Intercomparison (PCMDI),
Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, CA, USA
Francis Zwiers
Pacific Climate Impacts Consortium, Victoria BC, Canada
Michel Rixen
World Climate Research Programme, Geneva, Switzerland
Yohan Ruprich-Robert
Atmosphere and Ocean Sciences, Princeton University, Princeton,
NJ, USA
Rosie Eade
Met Office, Hadley
Centre, Exeter, UK
Related authors
No articles found.
John P. Dunne, Helene T. Hewitt, Julie M. Arblaster, Frédéric Bonou, Olivier Boucher, Tereza Cavazos, Beth Dingley, Paul J. Durack, Birgit Hassler, Martin Juckes, Tomoki Miyakawa, Matt Mizielinski, Vaishali Naik, Zebedee Nicholls, Eleanor O'Rourke, Robert Pincus, Benjamin M. Sanderson, Isla R. Simpson, and Karl E. Taylor
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 6671–6700, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-6671-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-6671-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
The seventh phase of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP7) coordinates efforts to answer key and timely climate science questions and facilitate delivery of relevant multi-model simulations for prediction and projection; characterization, attribution, and process understanding; and vulnerability, impact, and adaptation analysis. Key to the CMIP7 design are the mandatory Diagnostic, Evaluation and Characterization of Klima and optional Assessment Fast Track experiments.
Rémy Bonnet, Julien Boé, Emilia Sanchez-Gomez, and Christophe Cassou
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-4463, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-4463, 2025
This preprint is open for discussion and under review for Earth System Dynamics (ESD).
Short summary
Short summary
Near-term climate change projections are strongly affected by the uncertainty from internal climate variability. Here, we present a novel approach to reduce this uncertainty by combining information from both observations and decadal predictions to constrain climate projections. This new method can outperform decadal predictions and unconstrained ensemble temperature forecasts in some regions. This improved regional climate information could support more near-term targeted adaptation strategies.
Colin Jones, Isaline Bossert, Donovan P. Dennis, Hazel Jeffery, Chris D. Jones, Torben Koenigk, Sina Loriani, Benjamin Sanderson, Roland Séférian, Klaus Wyser, Shuting Yang, Manabu Abe, Sebastian Bathiany, Pascale Braconnot, Victor Brovkin, Friedrich A. Burger, Patrica Cadule, Frederic S. Castruccio, Gokhan Danabasoglu, Andrea Dittus, Jonathan F. Donges, Friederike Fröb, Thomas Frölicher, Goran Georgievski, Chuncheng Guo, Aixue Hu, Peter Lawrence, Paul Lerner, José Licón-Saláiz, Bette Otto-Bliesner, Anastasia Romanou, Elena Shevliakova, Yona Silvy, Didier Swingedouw, Jerry Tjiputra, Jeremy Walton, Andy Wiltshire, Ricarda Winkelmann, Richard Wood, Tokuta Yokohata, and Tilo Ziehn
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-3604, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-3604, 2025
This preprint is open for discussion and under review for Geoscientific Model Development (GMD).
Short summary
Short summary
We introduce a new Earth system model experiment protocol to help researchers understand how Earth might respond to positive, zero, and negative carbon emissions. This protocol enables different models to be compared following similar warming and cooling rates. Researchers use the models to explore how the Earth reacts to different climate futures, including the risk of tipping points being exceeded and whether changes can be reversed. The results will support improved long-term climate policy.
M. Andrea Orihuela-García, Yohan Ruprich-Robert, Vladimir Lapin, Saskia Loosveldt Tomas, Raffaele Bernardello, Margarida Samsó-Cabré, Pierre-Antoine Bretonnière, Miguel Castrillo, and Marti Gali
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.22541/essoar.174481514.42345660/v1, https://doi.org/10.22541/essoar.174481514.42345660/v1, 2025
This preprint is open for discussion and under review for Biogeosciences (BG).
Short summary
Short summary
Tiny oceanic algae absorb carbon using sunlight. When they die, some sink as "detritus" that oceanic creatures eat or bacteria decompose. This "biological carbon pump" stores carbon in the deep ocean. Our study found that in warm southern waters, particles decompose quickly but more survive deeper trips. In cold northern waters, creatures eat more particles. Winter water mixing moves carbon down before spring algae bloom. Understanding these processes helps predict future ocean carbon storage.
Piers M. Forster, Chris Smith, Tristram Walsh, William F. Lamb, Robin Lamboll, Christophe Cassou, Mathias Hauser, Zeke Hausfather, June-Yi Lee, Matthew D. Palmer, Karina von Schuckmann, Aimée B. A. Slangen, Sophie Szopa, Blair Trewin, Jeongeun Yun, Nathan P. Gillett, Stuart Jenkins, H. Damon Matthews, Krishnan Raghavan, Aurélien Ribes, Joeri Rogelj, Debbie Rosen, Xuebin Zhang, Myles Allen, Lara Aleluia Reis, Robbie M. Andrew, Richard A. Betts, Alex Borger, Jiddu A. Broersma, Samantha N. Burgess, Lijing Cheng, Pierre Friedlingstein, Catia M. Domingues, Marco Gambarini, Thomas Gasser, Johannes Gütschow, Masayoshi Ishii, Christopher Kadow, John Kennedy, Rachel E. Killick, Paul B. Krummel, Aurélien Liné, Didier P. Monselesan, Colin Morice, Jens Mühle, Vaishali Naik, Glen P. Peters, Anna Pirani, Julia Pongratz, Jan C. Minx, Matthew Rigby, Robert Rohde, Abhishek Savita, Sonia I. Seneviratne, Peter Thorne, Christopher Wells, Luke M. Western, Guido R. van der Werf, Susan E. Wijffels, Valérie Masson-Delmotte, and Panmao Zhai
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 17, 2641–2680, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-17-2641-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-17-2641-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
In a rapidly changing climate, evidence-based decision-making benefits from up-to-date and timely information. Here we compile monitoring datasets to track real-world changes over time. To make our work relevant to policymakers, we follow methods from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Human activities are increasing the Earth's energy imbalance and driving faster sea-level rise compared to the IPCC assessment.
Ricarda Winkelmann, Donovan P. Dennis, Jonathan F. Donges, Sina Loriani, Ann Kristin Klose, Jesse F. Abrams, Jorge Alvarez-Solas, Torsten Albrecht, David Armstrong McKay, Sebastian Bathiany, Javier Blasco Navarro, Victor Brovkin, Eleanor Burke, Gokhan Danabasoglu, Reik V. Donner, Markus Drüke, Goran Georgievski, Heiko Goelzer, Anna B. Harper, Gabriele Hegerl, Marina Hirota, Aixue Hu, Laura C. Jackson, Colin Jones, Hyungjun Kim, Torben Koenigk, Peter Lawrence, Timothy M. Lenton, Hannah Liddy, José Licón-Saláiz, Maxence Menthon, Marisa Montoya, Jan Nitzbon, Sophie Nowicki, Bette Otto-Bliesner, Francesco Pausata, Stefan Rahmstorf, Karoline Ramin, Alexander Robinson, Johan Rockström, Anastasia Romanou, Boris Sakschewski, Christina Schädel, Steven Sherwood, Robin S. Smith, Norman J. Steinert, Didier Swingedouw, Matteo Willeit, Wilbert Weijer, Richard Wood, Klaus Wyser, and Shuting Yang
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1899, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1899, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
The Tipping Points Modelling Intercomparison Project (TIPMIP) is an international collaborative effort to systematically assess tipping point risks in the Earth system using state-of-the-art coupled and stand-alone domain models. TIPMIP will provide a first global atlas of potential tipping dynamics, respective critical thresholds and key uncertainties, generating an important building block towards a comprehensive scientific basis for policy- and decision-making.
Wolfgang A. Müller, Stephan Lorenz, Trang V. Pham, Andrea Schneidereit, Renate Brokopf, Victor Brovkin, Nils Brüggemann, Fatemeh Chegini, Dietmar Dommenget, Kristina Fröhlich, Barbara Früh, Veronika Gayler, Helmuth Haak, Stefan Hagemann, Moritz Hanke, Tatiana Ilyina, Johann Jungclaus, Martin Köhler, Peter Korn, Luis Kornblüh, Clarissa Kroll, Julian Krüger, Karel Castro-Morales, Ulrike Niemeier, Holger Pohlmann, Iuliia Polkova, Roland Potthast, Thomas Riddick, Manuel Schlund, Tobias Stacke, Roland Wirth, Dakuan Yu, and Jochem Marotzke
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-2473, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-2473, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
ICON XPP is a newly developed Earth System model configuration based on the ICON modeling framework. It merges accomplishments from the recent operational numerical weather prediction model with well-established climate components for the ocean, land and ocean-biogeochemistry. ICON XPP reaches typical targets of a coupled climate simulation, and is able to run long integrations and large-ensemble experiments, making it suitable for climate predictions and projections, and for climate research.
Martin Juckes, Karl E. Taylor, Fabrizio Antonio, David Brayshaw, Carlo Buontempo, Jian Cao, Paul J. Durack, Michio Kawamiya, Hyungjun Kim, Tomas Lovato, Chloe Mackallah, Matthew Mizielinski, Alessandra Nuzzo, Martina Stockhause, Daniele Visioni, Jeremy Walton, Briony Turner, Eleanor O'Rourke, and Beth Dingley
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 2639–2663, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-2639-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-2639-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
The Baseline Climate Variables for Earth System Modelling (ESM-BCVs) are defined as a list of 135 variables which have high utility for the evaluation and exploitation of climate simulations. The list reflects the most frequently used variables from Earth system models based on an assessment of data publication and download records from the largest archive of global climate projects.
Ingo Richter, Ping Chang, Ping-Gin Chiu, Gokhan Danabasoglu, Takeshi Doi, Dietmar Dommenget, Guillaume Gastineau, Zoe E. Gillett, Aixue Hu, Takahito Kataoka, Noel S. Keenlyside, Fred Kucharski, Yuko M. Okumura, Wonsun Park, Malte F. Stuecker, Andréa S. Taschetto, Chunzai Wang, Stephen G. Yeager, and Sang-Wook Yeh
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 2587–2608, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-2587-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-2587-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Tropical ocean basins influence each other through multiple pathways and mechanisms, referred to here as tropical basin interaction (TBI). Many researchers have examined TBI using comprehensive climate models but have obtained conflicting results. This may be partly due to differences in experiment protocols and partly due to systematic model errors. The Tropical Basin Interaction Model Intercomparison Project (TBIMIP) aims to address this problem by designing a set of TBI experiments that will be performed by multiple models.
Malcolm J. 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
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 1307–1332, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-1307-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-1307-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
HighResMIP2 is a model intercomparison project focusing on high-resolution global climate models, that is, those with grid spacings of 25 km or less in the atmosphere and ocean, using simulations of decades to a century in length. We are proposing an update of our simulation protocol to make the models more applicable to key questions for climate variability and hazard in present-day and future projections and to build links with other communities to provide more robust climate information.
Hendrik Großelindemann, Frederic S. Castruccio, Gokhan Danabasoglu, and Arne Biastoch
Ocean Sci., 21, 93–112, https://doi.org/10.5194/os-21-93-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/os-21-93-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
This study investigates the Agulhas Leakage and examines its role in the global ocean circulation. It utilises a high-resolution Earth system model and a preindustrial climate to look at the response of the Agulhas Leakage to the wind field and the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation (AMOC) and its evolution under climate change. The Agulhas Leakage could influence the stability of the AMOC, whose possible collapse would impact the climate in the Northern Hemisphere.
Paul J. Durack, Karl E. Taylor, Peter J. Gleckler, Gerald A. Meehl, Bryan N. Lawrence, Curt Covey, Ronald J. Stouffer, Guillaume Levavasseur, Atef Ben-Nasser, Sebastien Denvil, Martina Stockhause, Jonathan M. Gregory, Martin Juckes, Sasha K. Ames, Fabrizio Antonio, David C. Bader, John P. Dunne, Daniel Ellis, Veronika Eyring, Sandro L. Fiore, Sylvie Joussaume, Philip Kershaw, Jean-Francois Lamarque, Michael Lautenschlager, Jiwoo Lee, Chris F. Mauzey, Matthew Mizielinski, Paola Nassisi, Alessandra Nuzzo, Eleanor O’Rourke, Jeffrey Painter, Gerald L. Potter, Sven Rodriguez, and Dean N. Williams
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-3729, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-3729, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
CMIP6 was the most expansive and ambitious Model Intercomparison Project (MIP), the latest in a history, extending four decades. CMIP engaged a growing community focused on improving climate understanding, and quantifying and attributing observed climate change being experienced today. The project's profound impact is due to the combining the latest climate science and technology, enabling the latest-generation climate simulations and increasing community attention in every successive phase.
Raffaele Bernardello, Valentina Sicardi, Vladimir Lapin, Pablo Ortega, Yohan Ruprich-Robert, Etienne Tourigny, and Eric Ferrer
Earth Syst. Dynam., 15, 1255–1275, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-15-1255-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-15-1255-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
The ocean mitigates climate change by absorbing about 25 % of the carbon that is emitted to the atmosphere. However, ocean CO2 uptake is not constant in time, and improving our understanding of the mechanisms regulating this variability can potentially lead to a better predictive capability of its future behavior. In this study, we compare two ocean modeling practices that are used to reconstruct the historical ocean carbon uptake, demonstrating the abilities of one over the other.
Soufiane Karmouche, Evgenia Galytska, Gerald A. Meehl, Jakob Runge, Katja Weigel, and Veronika Eyring
Earth Syst. Dynam., 15, 689–715, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-15-689-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-15-689-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
This study explores Atlantic–Pacific interactions and their response to external factors. Causal analysis of 1950–2014 data reveals a shift from a Pacific- to an Atlantic-driven regime. Contrasting impacts between El Niño and tropical Atlantic temperatures are highlighted, along with different pathways connecting the two oceans. The findings also suggest increasing remote contributions of forced Atlantic responses in modulating local Pacific responses during the most recent analyzed decades.
Jiwoo Lee, Peter J. Gleckler, Min-Seop Ahn, Ana Ordonez, Paul A. Ullrich, Kenneth R. Sperber, Karl E. Taylor, Yann Y. Planton, Eric Guilyardi, Paul Durack, Celine Bonfils, Mark D. Zelinka, Li-Wei Chao, Bo Dong, Charles Doutriaux, Chengzhu Zhang, Tom Vo, Jason Boutte, Michael F. Wehner, Angeline G. Pendergrass, Daehyun Kim, Zeyu Xue, Andrew T. Wittenberg, and John Krasting
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 3919–3948, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-3919-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-3919-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
We introduce an open-source software, the PCMDI Metrics Package (PMP), developed for a comprehensive comparison of Earth system models (ESMs) with real-world observations. Using diverse metrics evaluating climatology, variability, and extremes simulated in thousands of simulations from the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP), PMP aids in benchmarking model improvements across generations. PMP also enables efficient tracking of performance evolutions during ESM developments.
Roberto Bilbao, Pablo Ortega, Didier Swingedouw, Leon Hermanson, Panos Athanasiadis, Rosie Eade, Marion Devilliers, Francisco Doblas-Reyes, Nick Dunstone, An-Chi Ho, William Merryfield, Juliette Mignot, Dario Nicolì, Margarida Samsó, Reinel Sospedra-Alfonso, Xian Wu, and Stephen Yeager
Earth Syst. Dynam., 15, 501–525, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-15-501-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-15-501-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
In recent decades three major volcanic eruptions have occurred: Mount Agung in 1963, El Chichón in 1982 and Mount Pinatubo in 1991. In this article we explore the climatic impacts of these volcanic eruptions with a purposefully designed set of simulations from six CMIP6 decadal prediction systems. We analyse the radiative and dynamical responses and show that including the volcanic forcing in these predictions is important to reproduce the observed surface temperature variations.
John T. Fasullo, Jean-Christophe Golaz, Julie M. Caron, Nan Rosenbloom, Gerald A. Meehl, Warren Strand, Sasha Glanville, Samantha Stevenson, Maria Molina, Christine A. Shields, Chengzhu Zhang, James Benedict, Hailong Wang, and Tony Bartoletti
Earth Syst. Dynam., 15, 367–386, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-15-367-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-15-367-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Climate model large ensembles provide a unique and invaluable means for estimating the climate response to external forcing agents and quantify contrasts in model structure. Here, an overview of the Energy Exascale Earth System Model (E3SM) version 2 large ensemble is given along with comparisons to large ensembles from E3SM version 1 and versions 1 and 2 of the Community Earth System Model. The paper provides broad and important context for users of these ensembles.
Karl E. Taylor
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 415–430, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-415-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-415-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Remapping gridded data in a way that preserves the conservative properties of the climate system can be essential in coupling model components and for accurate assessment of the system’s energy and mass constituents. Remapping packages capable of handling a wide variety of grids can, for some common grids, calculate remapping weights that are somewhat inaccurate. Correcting for these errors, guidelines are provided to ensure conservation when the weights are used in practice.
Lara Wallberg, Laura Suarez-Gutierrez, Daniela Matei, and Wolfgang A. Müller
Earth Syst. Dynam., 15, 1–14, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-15-1-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-15-1-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
European summer temperatures are influenced by mechanisms on different timescales. We find that timescales of 5 to 10 years dominate the changes in summer temperature over large parts of the continent. Further, we find that specific processes within the North Atlantic, affecting the storage and transport of heat, cause changes in the atmosphere and extremely warm European summers. Our findings could be used for better forecasts of extremely warm European summers several years ahead.
Samah Larabi, Juliane Mai, Markus Schnorbus, Bryan A. Tolson, and Francis Zwiers
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 27, 3241–3263, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-27-3241-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-27-3241-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
The computational cost of sensitivity analysis (SA) becomes prohibitive for large hydrologic modeling domains. Here, using a large-scale Variable Infiltration Capacity (VIC) deployment, we show that watershed classification helps identify the spatial pattern of parameter sensitivity within the domain at a reduced cost. Findings reveal the opportunity to leverage climate and land cover attributes to reduce the cost of SA and facilitate more rapid deployment of large-scale land surface models.
Steve Delhaye, Rym Msadek, Thierry Fichefet, François Massonnet, and Laurent Terray
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-1748, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-1748, 2023
Preprint archived
Short summary
Short summary
The climate impact of Arctic sea ice loss may depend on the region of sea ice loss and the methodology used to study this impact. This study uses two approaches across seven climate models to investigate the winter atmospheric circulation response to regional sea ice loss. Our findings indicate a consistent atmospheric circulation response to pan-Arctic sea ice loss in most models and across both approaches. In contrast, more uncertainty emerges in the responses linked to regional sea ice loss.
Mark D. Zelinka, Christopher J. Smith, Yi Qin, and Karl E. Taylor
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 23, 8879–8898, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-8879-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-8879-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
The primary uncertainty in how strongly Earth's climate has been perturbed by human activities comes from the unknown radiative impact of aerosol changes. Accurately quantifying these forcings – and their sub-components – in climate models is crucial for understanding the past and future simulated climate. In this study we describe biases in previously published estimates of aerosol radiative forcing in climate models and provide corrected estimates along with code for users to compute them.
Andrew P. Schurer, Gabriele C. Hegerl, Hugues Goosse, Massimo A. Bollasina, Matthew H. England, Michael J. Mineter, Doug M. Smith, and Simon F. B. Tett
Clim. Past, 19, 943–957, https://doi.org/10.5194/cp-19-943-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/cp-19-943-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
We adopt an existing data assimilation technique to constrain a model simulation to follow three important modes of variability, the North Atlantic Oscillation, El Niño–Southern Oscillation and the Southern Annular Mode. How it compares to the observed climate is evaluated, with improvements over simulations without data assimilation found over many regions, particularly the tropics, the North Atlantic and Europe, and discrepancies with global cooling following volcanic eruptions are reconciled.
Katherine E. Turner, Doug M. Smith, Anna Katavouta, and Richard G. Williams
Biogeosciences, 20, 1671–1690, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-20-1671-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-20-1671-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
We present a new method for reconstructing ocean carbon using climate models and temperature and salinity observations. To test this method, we reconstruct modelled carbon using synthetic observations consistent with current sampling programmes. Sensitivity tests show skill in reconstructing carbon trends and variability within the upper 2000 m. Our results indicate that this method can be used for a new global estimate for ocean carbon content.
Laura C. Jackson, Eduardo Alastrué de Asenjo, Katinka Bellomo, Gokhan Danabasoglu, Helmuth Haak, Aixue Hu, Johann Jungclaus, Warren Lee, Virna L. Meccia, Oleg Saenko, Andrew Shao, and Didier Swingedouw
Geosci. Model Dev., 16, 1975–1995, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-1975-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-1975-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
The Atlantic meridional overturning circulation (AMOC) has an important impact on the climate. There are theories that freshening of the ocean might cause the AMOC to cross a tipping point (TP) beyond which recovery is difficult; however, it is unclear whether TPs exist in global climate models. Here, we outline a set of experiments designed to explore AMOC tipping points and sensitivity to additional freshwater input as part of the North Atlantic Hosing Model Intercomparison Project (NAHosMIP).
Soufiane Karmouche, Evgenia Galytska, Jakob Runge, Gerald A. Meehl, Adam S. Phillips, Katja Weigel, and Veronika Eyring
Earth Syst. Dynam., 14, 309–344, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-14-309-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-14-309-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
This study uses a causal discovery method to evaluate the ability of climate models to represent the interactions between the Atlantic multidecadal variability (AMV) and the Pacific decadal variability (PDV). The approach and findings in this study present a powerful methodology that can be applied to a number of environment-related topics, offering tremendous insights to improve the understanding of the complex Earth system and the state of the art of climate modeling.
Stephen G. Yeager, Nan Rosenbloom, Anne A. Glanville, Xian Wu, Isla Simpson, Hui Li, Maria J. Molina, Kristen Krumhardt, Samuel Mogen, Keith Lindsay, Danica Lombardozzi, Will Wieder, Who M. Kim, Jadwiga H. Richter, Matthew Long, Gokhan Danabasoglu, David Bailey, Marika Holland, Nicole Lovenduski, Warren G. Strand, and Teagan King
Geosci. Model Dev., 15, 6451–6493, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-6451-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-6451-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
The Earth system changes over a range of time and space scales, and some of these changes are predictable in advance. Short-term weather forecasts are most familiar, but recent work has shown that it is possible to generate useful predictions several seasons or even a decade in advance. This study focuses on predictions over intermediate timescales (up to 24 months in advance) and shows that there is promising potential to forecast a variety of changes in the natural environment.
Steve Delhaye, Thierry Fichefet, François Massonnet, David Docquier, Rym Msadek, Svenya Chripko, Christopher Roberts, Sarah Keeley, and Retish Senan
Weather Clim. Dynam., 3, 555–573, https://doi.org/10.5194/wcd-3-555-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/wcd-3-555-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
It is unclear how the atmosphere will respond to a retreat of summer Arctic sea ice. Much attention has been paid so far to weather extremes at mid-latitude and in winter. Here we focus on the changes in extremes in surface air temperature and precipitation over the Arctic regions in summer during and following abrupt sea ice retreats. We find that Arctic sea ice loss clearly shifts the extremes in surface air temperature and precipitation over terrestrial regions surrounding the Arctic Ocean.
Ralf Döscher, Mario Acosta, Andrea Alessandri, Peter Anthoni, Thomas Arsouze, Tommi Bergman, Raffaele Bernardello, Souhail Boussetta, Louis-Philippe Caron, Glenn Carver, Miguel Castrillo, Franco Catalano, Ivana Cvijanovic, Paolo Davini, Evelien Dekker, Francisco J. Doblas-Reyes, David Docquier, Pablo Echevarria, Uwe Fladrich, Ramon Fuentes-Franco, Matthias Gröger, Jost v. Hardenberg, Jenny Hieronymus, M. Pasha Karami, Jukka-Pekka Keskinen, Torben Koenigk, Risto Makkonen, François Massonnet, Martin Ménégoz, Paul A. Miller, Eduardo Moreno-Chamarro, Lars Nieradzik, Twan van Noije, Paul Nolan, Declan O'Donnell, Pirkka Ollinaho, Gijs van den Oord, Pablo Ortega, Oriol Tintó Prims, Arthur Ramos, Thomas Reerink, Clement Rousset, Yohan Ruprich-Robert, Philippe Le Sager, Torben Schmith, Roland Schrödner, Federico Serva, Valentina Sicardi, Marianne Sloth Madsen, Benjamin Smith, Tian Tian, Etienne Tourigny, Petteri Uotila, Martin Vancoppenolle, Shiyu Wang, David Wårlind, Ulrika Willén, Klaus Wyser, Shuting Yang, Xavier Yepes-Arbós, and Qiong Zhang
Geosci. Model Dev., 15, 2973–3020, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-2973-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-2973-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
The Earth system model EC-Earth3 is documented here. Key performance metrics show physical behavior and biases well within the frame known from recent models. With improved physical and dynamic features, new ESM components, community tools, and largely improved physical performance compared to the CMIP5 version, EC-Earth3 represents a clear step forward for the only European community ESM. We demonstrate here that EC-Earth3 is suited for a range of tasks in CMIP6 and beyond.
Keith B. Rodgers, Sun-Seon Lee, Nan Rosenbloom, Axel Timmermann, Gokhan Danabasoglu, Clara Deser, Jim Edwards, Ji-Eun Kim, Isla R. Simpson, Karl Stein, Malte F. Stuecker, Ryohei Yamaguchi, Tamás Bódai, Eui-Seok Chung, Lei Huang, Who M. Kim, Jean-François Lamarque, Danica L. Lombardozzi, William R. Wieder, and Stephen G. Yeager
Earth Syst. Dynam., 12, 1393–1411, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-12-1393-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-12-1393-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
A large ensemble of simulations with 100 members has been conducted with the state-of-the-art CESM2 Earth system model, using historical and SSP3-7.0 forcing. Our main finding is that there are significant changes in the variance of the Earth system in response to anthropogenic forcing, with these changes spanning a broad range of variables important to impacts for human populations and ecosystems.
Constantin Ardilouze, Damien Specq, Lauriane Batté, and Christophe Cassou
Weather Clim. Dynam., 2, 1033–1049, https://doi.org/10.5194/wcd-2-1033-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/wcd-2-1033-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
Forecasting temperature patterns beyond 2 weeks is very challenging, although occasionally, forecasts show more skill over Europe. Our study indicates that the level of skill varies concurrently for two distinct forecast systems. It also shows that higher skill occurs when forecasts are issued during specific patterns of atmospheric circulation that tend to be particularly persistent.
These results could help forecasters estimate a priori how trustworthy extended-range forecasts will be.
James Keeble, Birgit Hassler, Antara Banerjee, Ramiro Checa-Garcia, Gabriel Chiodo, Sean Davis, Veronika Eyring, Paul T. Griffiths, Olaf Morgenstern, Peer Nowack, Guang Zeng, Jiankai Zhang, Greg Bodeker, Susannah Burrows, Philip Cameron-Smith, David Cugnet, Christopher Danek, Makoto Deushi, Larry W. Horowitz, Anne Kubin, Lijuan Li, Gerrit Lohmann, Martine Michou, Michael J. Mills, Pierre Nabat, Dirk Olivié, Sungsu Park, Øyvind Seland, Jens Stoll, Karl-Hermann Wieners, and Tongwen Wu
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 5015–5061, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-5015-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-5015-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
Stratospheric ozone and water vapour are key components of the Earth system; changes to both have important impacts on global and regional climate. We evaluate changes to these species from 1850 to 2100 in the new generation of CMIP6 models. There is good agreement between the multi-model mean and observations, although there is substantial variation between the individual models. The future evolution of both ozone and water vapour is strongly dependent on the assumed future emissions scenario.
Claudia Tebaldi, Kevin Debeire, Veronika Eyring, Erich Fischer, John Fyfe, Pierre Friedlingstein, Reto Knutti, Jason Lowe, Brian O'Neill, Benjamin Sanderson, Detlef van Vuuren, Keywan Riahi, Malte Meinshausen, Zebedee Nicholls, Katarzyna B. Tokarska, George Hurtt, Elmar Kriegler, Jean-Francois Lamarque, Gerald Meehl, Richard Moss, Susanne E. Bauer, Olivier Boucher, Victor Brovkin, Young-Hwa Byun, Martin Dix, Silvio Gualdi, Huan Guo, Jasmin G. John, Slava Kharin, YoungHo Kim, Tsuyoshi Koshiro, Libin Ma, Dirk Olivié, Swapna Panickal, Fangli Qiao, Xinyao Rong, Nan Rosenbloom, Martin Schupfner, Roland Séférian, Alistair Sellar, Tido Semmler, Xiaoying Shi, Zhenya Song, Christian Steger, Ronald Stouffer, Neil Swart, Kaoru Tachiiri, Qi Tang, Hiroaki Tatebe, Aurore Voldoire, Evgeny Volodin, Klaus Wyser, Xiaoge Xin, Shuting Yang, Yongqiang Yu, and Tilo Ziehn
Earth Syst. Dynam., 12, 253–293, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-12-253-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-12-253-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
We present an overview of CMIP6 ScenarioMIP outcomes from up to 38 participating ESMs according to the new SSP-based scenarios. Average temperature and precipitation projections according to a wide range of forcings, spanning a wider range than the CMIP5 projections, are documented as global averages and geographic patterns. Times of crossing various warming levels are computed, together with benefits of mitigation for selected pairs of scenarios. Comparisons with CMIP5 are also discussed.
Roberto Bilbao, Simon Wild, Pablo Ortega, Juan Acosta-Navarro, Thomas Arsouze, Pierre-Antoine Bretonnière, Louis-Philippe Caron, Miguel Castrillo, Rubén Cruz-García, Ivana Cvijanovic, Francisco Javier Doblas-Reyes, Markus Donat, Emanuel Dutra, Pablo Echevarría, An-Chi Ho, Saskia Loosveldt-Tomas, Eduardo Moreno-Chamarro, Núria Pérez-Zanon, Arthur Ramos, Yohan Ruprich-Robert, Valentina Sicardi, Etienne Tourigny, and Javier Vegas-Regidor
Earth Syst. Dynam., 12, 173–196, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-12-173-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-12-173-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
This paper presents and evaluates a set of retrospective decadal predictions with the EC-Earth3 climate model. These experiments successfully predict past changes in surface air temperature but show poor predictive capacity in the subpolar North Atlantic, a well-known source region of decadal climate variability. The poor predictive capacity is linked to an initial shock affecting the Atlantic Ocean circulation, ultimately due to a suboptimal representation of the Labrador Sea density.
Ruth Petrie, Sébastien Denvil, Sasha Ames, Guillaume Levavasseur, Sandro Fiore, Chris Allen, Fabrizio Antonio, Katharina Berger, Pierre-Antoine Bretonnière, Luca Cinquini, Eli Dart, Prashanth Dwarakanath, Kelsey Druken, Ben Evans, Laurent Franchistéguy, Sébastien Gardoll, Eric Gerbier, Mark Greenslade, David Hassell, Alan Iwi, Martin Juckes, Stephan Kindermann, Lukasz Lacinski, Maria Mirto, Atef Ben Nasser, Paola Nassisi, Eric Nienhouse, Sergey Nikonov, Alessandra Nuzzo, Clare Richards, Syazwan Ridzwan, Michel Rixen, Kim Serradell, Kate Snow, Ag Stephens, Martina Stockhause, Hans Vahlenkamp, and Rick Wagner
Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 629–644, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-629-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-629-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
This paper describes the infrastructure that is used to distribute Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6) data around the world for analysis by the climate research community. It is expected that there will be ~20 PB (petabytes) of data available for analysis. The operations team performed a series of preparation "data challenges" to ensure all components of the infrastructure were operational for when the data became available for timely data distribution and subsequent analysis.
Cited articles
Asrar, R. A. and Hurrell, J. W. (Eds.): Climate Science for Serving Society, Springer, Dordrecht, 484 pp., https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-6692-1, 2013.
Balmaseda, M. A., Hernandez, F., Storto, A., Palmer, M. D., Alves, O., Shi, L., Smith, G. C., Toyoda, T., Valdivieso, M., Barnier, B., Behringer, D., Boyer, T., Chang, Y.-S., Chepurin, G. A., Ferry, N., Forget, G., Fujii, Y., Good, S., Guinehut, S., Haines, K., Ishikawa, Y., Keeley, S., Köhl, A., Lee, T., Martin, M. J., Masina, S., Masuda, S., Meyssignac, B., Mogensen, K., Parent, L., Peterson, K. A., Tang, Y. M., Yin, Y., Vernieres, G., Wang, X., Waters, J., Wedd, R., Wang, O., Xue, Y., Chevallier, M., Lemieux, J.-F., Dupont, F., Kuragano, T., Kamachi, M., Awaji, T., Caltabiano, A., Wilmer-Becker, K., and Gaillard, F.: The Ocean Reanalyses Intercomparison Project (ORA-IP), Journal of Operational Oceanography, 8, 80–97, https://doi.org/10.1080/1755876X.2015.1022329, 2015.
Bauer, P., Thorpe, A., and Brunet, G.: The quiet revolution of numerical weather prediction, Nature, 525, 47–55, https://doi.org/10.1038/nature14956, 2015.
Boer, G. J., Kharin, V. V., and Merryfield, W. J.: Decadal predictability and forecast skill, Clim. Dynam., 41, 1817, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-013-1705-0, 2013.
Caron, L.-P., Hermanson, L., and Doblas-Reyes, F. J.: Multi-annual forecasts of Atlantic U.S. tropical cyclone wind damage potential, Geophys. Res. Lett., 42, 2417–2425, https://doi.org/10.1002/2015GL063303, 2015.
DelSole, T., Nattala, J., and Tippett, M. K.: Skill improvement from increased ensemble size and model diversity, Geophys. Res. Lett., 41, 7331–7342, https://doi.org/10.1002/2014GL060133, 2014.
Doblas-Reyes, F. J., Andreu-Burillo, I., Chikamoto, Y., García-Serrano, J., Guemas, V., Kimoto, M., Mochizuki, T., Rodrigues, L. R. L., and van Oldenborgh, G. J.: Initialized near-term regional climate change prediction, Nat. Commun., 4, 1715, https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms2704, 2013.
Eade, R., Smith, D., Scaife, A., Wallace, E., Dunstone, N., Hermanson, L., and Robinson, N.: Do seasonal-to-decadal climate predictions underestimate the predictability of the real world?, Geophys. Res. Lett., 41, 5620–5628, https://doi.org/10.1002/2014GL061146, 2014.
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, 2016.
Fučkar, N. S., Volpi, D., Guemas, V., and Doblas-Reyes, F. J.: A posteriori adjustment of near-term climate predictions: Accounting for the drift dependence on the initial conditions, Geophys. Res. Lett., 41, 5200–5207, https://doi.org/10.1002/2014GL060815, 2014.
Gangstø, R., Weigel, A. P., Liniger, M. A., and Appenzeller, C.: Methodological aspects of the validation of decadal predictions, Clim. Res., 55, 181–200, 2013.
Gerber, E. P. and Manzini, E.: DynVarMIP: Assessing the Dynamics and Variability of the Stratosphere-Troposphere System, Geosci. Model Dev. Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-2016-80, in review, 2016.
Goddard, L., Kumar, A., Solomon, A., Smith, D., Boer, G., Gonzalez, P., Kharin, V., Merryfield M., Deser, C., Mason, S., Kirtman, B., Msadek, R., Sutton, R., Hawkins, E., Fricker, T., Hegerl G., Ferro, C., Stephenson, D., Meehl, G., Stockdale, T., Burgman, R., Greene, A., Kushnir, Y., Newman, M., Carton, J., Fukumori, I., and Delworth, T.: A verification framework for interannual-to-decadal predictions experiments, Clim. Dynam., 40, 245–272, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-012-1481-2, 2013.
Graham, R., Yun, W.-T., Kim, J., Kumar, A., Jones, D., Bettio, L., Gagnon, N., Kolli, R., and Smith, D.: Long-range forecasting and the global framework for climate services, Clim. Res., 47, 47–55, https://doi.org/10.3354/cr00963, 2011.
Hazeleger, W., Guemas, V., Wouters, B., Corti, S., Andreu-Burillo, I., Doblas-Reyes, F. J., Wyser, K., and Caian, M.: Multiyear climate predictions using two initialization strategies, Geophys. Res. Lett., 40, 1794–1798, https://doi.org/10.1002/grl.50355, 2013.
Hawkins, E., Dong, B., Robson, J., Sutton, R., and Smith, D.: The interpretation and use of biases in decadal climate predictions, J. Climate, 27, 2931–2947, https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-13-00473.1, 2014.
Hawkins, E., Tietsche, S., Day, J., Melia, N., Haines, K., and Keeley, S.: Aspects of designing and evaluating seasonal-to-interannual Arcticsea-ice prediction systems, Q. J. Roy. Meteorol. Soc., 142, 672–683, https://doi.org/10.1002/qj.2643, 2016.
Huang, B., Banzon, V. F., Freeman, E., Lawrimore, J., Liu, W., Peterson, T. C., Smith, T. M., Thorne, P. W., Woodruff, S. D., and Zhang, H.-M.: Extended Reconstructed Sea Surface Temperature version 4 (ERSST.v4): Part I. Upgrades and intercomparisons, J. Climate, https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-14-00006.1, online first, 2015.
ICPO (International CLIVAR Project Office): Data and bias correction for decadal climate predictions, International CLIVAR Project Office, CLIVAR Publication Series No. 150, p. 6, available at: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/171975/1/ICPO150_Bias.pdf (last access: 14 September 2016), 2011.
IPCC: 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., Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA, 1535 pp., https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107415324, 2013.
Jolliffe, I. and Stephenson, D. (Eds.): Forecast Verification: A Practitioner's Guide in Atmospheric Science, 2nd Edn., Wiley, 292 pp., ISBN: 978-0-470-66071-3, 2011.
Kharin, V. V., Boer, G. J., Merryfield, W. J., Scinocca, J. F., and Lee, W.-S.: Statistical adjustment of decadal predictions in a changing climate, Geophys. Res. Lett., 39, L19705, https://doi.org/10.1029/2012GL052647, 2012.
Kirtman, B., Power, S. B., Adedoyin, J. A., Boer, G. J., Bojariu, R., Camilloni, I., Doblas-Reyes, F. J., Fiore, A. M., Kimoto, M., Meehl, G. A., Prather, M., Sarr, A., Schär, C., Sutton, R., van Oldenborgh, G. J., Vecchi, G., and Wang, H. J.: Near-term Climate Change: Projections and Predictability, 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, edtied 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., Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA, 2013.
Kosaka, K. and Xie, S.-P.: Recent global-warming hiatus tied to equatorial Pacific surface cooling, Nature, 501, 403–407, 2013.
Kruschke, T., Rust, H. W., Kadow, C., Müller, W. A., Pohlmann, H., Leckebusch, G. C., and Ulbrich, U.: Probabilistic evaluation of decadal prediction skill regarding Northern Hemisphere winter storms, Meteorol. Z., https://doi.org/10.1127/metz/2015/0641, online first, 2015.
Kushnir, Y., Scaife, A., Arritt, R., Boer, G. J., Carlson, D., Doblas-Reyes, F., Hawkins, E., Kimoto, M., Kumar, A., Matthes, K., Perlwitz, J., Power, S., Raphael, M., Shimpo, A., and Smith, D.: WCRP Grand Challenge on Near Term Climate Prediction, in preparation, 2016.
Ma, H.-Y., Xie, S., Klein, S., Williams, K., Boyle, J., Bony, S., Douville, H., Fermepin, S., Medeiros, B., Tyteca, S., Watanabe, M., and Williamson, D.: On the Correspondence between Mean Forecast Errors and Climate Errors in CMIP5 Models, J. Climate, 27, 1781–1798, https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-13-00474.1, 2014.
MacLachlan, C., Arribas, A., Peterson, K. A., Maidens, A., Fereday, D., Scaife, A. A., Gordon, M., Vellinga, M., Williams, A., Comer, R. E., Camp, J., Xavier, P., and Madec, G.: Global Seasonal forecast system version 5 (GloSea5): a high-resolution seasonal forecast system, Q. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc., 141, 1072–1084, https://doi.org/10.1002/qj.2396, 2015.
Magnusson, L., Balmaseda, M., Corti, S., Molteni, F., and Stockdale, T.: Evaluation of forecast strategies for seasonal and decadal forecasts in presence of systematic model errors, Clim. Dynam., 41, 2393, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-012-1599-2, 2012.
Maher, N., McGregor, S., England, M. H., and Sen Gupta, A.: Effects of volcanism on tropical variability, Geophys. Res. Lett., 42, 6024–6033, https://doi.org/10.1002/2015GL064751, 2015.
Matthes, K., Funke, B., Anderson, M. E., Barnard, L., Beer, J., Charbonneau, P., Clilverd, M. A., Dudok de Wit, T., Haberreiter, M., Hendry, A., Jackman, C. H., Kretschmar, M., Kruschke, T., Kunze, M., Langematz, U., Marsh, D. R., Maycock, A., Misios, S., Rodger, C. J., Scaife, A. A., Seppälä, A., Shangguan, M., Sinnhuber, M., Tourpali, K., Usoskin, I., van de Kamp, M., Verronen, P. T., and Versick, S.: Solar Forcing for CMIP6 (v3.1), Geosci. Model Dev. Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-2016-91, in review, 2016.
Meehl, G. A., Teng, H., Maher, N., and England, M. H.: Effects of the Mt. Pinatubo eruption on decadal climate prediction skill, Geophys. Res. Lett., 42, 10840–10846, https://doi.org/10.1002/2015GL066608, 2015.
Msadek, R., Delworth, T. L., Rosati, A., Anderson, W., Vecchi, G., Chang, Y.-S., Dixon, K., Gudgel, R. G., Stern, W., Wittenberg, A., Yang, X., Zeng, F., Zhang, R., and Zhang, S.: Predicting a decadal shift in North Atlantic climate variability using the GFDL forecast system, J. Climate, 27, 6472–6496, 2014.
O'Neill, B. C., Tebaldi, C., van Vuuren, D., Eyring, V., Friedlingstein, P., Hurtt, G., Knutti, R., Kriegler, E., Lamarque, J.-F., Lowe, J., Meehl, J., Moss, R., Riahi, K., and Sanderson, B. M.: The Scenario Model Intercomparison Project (ScenarioMIP) for CMIP6, Geosci. Model Dev. Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-2016-84, in review, 2016.
Robson, J. I., Sutton, R. T., and Smith, D. M.: Initialized decadal predictions of the rapid warming of the North Atlantic ocean in the mid 1990s, Geophys. Res. Letts., 39, L19713, https://doi.org/10.1029/2012GL053370, 2012.
Robson, J. I., Sutton, R. T., and Smith, D. M.: Predictable climate impacts of the decadal changes in the ocean in the 1990s, J. Climate, 26, 6329–6339, https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-12-00827.1, 2013.
Ruprich-Robert, Y., Msadek, R., Castruccio, F., Yeager, S., Delworth, T., and Danabasoglu, G.: Assessing the climate impacts of the observed Atlantic multidecadal variability using the GFDL CM2.1 and NCAR CESM1 global coupled models, J. Climate, submitted, 2016.
Sienz, F., Müller, W. A., and Pohlmann, H.: Ensemble size impact on the decadal predictive skill assessment, Meteorol. Z., https://doi.org/10.1127/metz/2016/0670, online first, 2016.
Smith, D. M., Eade, R., Dunstone, N. J., Fereday, D., Murphy, J. M., Pohlmann, H., and Scaife, A. A.: Skilful multi-year predictions of Atlantic hurricane frequency, Nat. Geosci., 3, 846–849, https://doi.org/10.1038/NGEO1004, 2010.
Smith, D. M., Scaife, A. A., and Kirtman, B. P.: What is the current state of scientific knowledge with regard to seasonal and decadal forecasting?, Environ. Res. Lett., 7, 015602, https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/7/1/015602, 2012.
Smith, D. M., Scaife, A. A., Boer, G. J., Caian, M., Doblas-Reyes, F. J., Guemas, V., Hawkins, E., Hazeleger, W., Hermanson, L., Ho, C. K., Ishii, M., Kharin, V., Kimoto, M., Kirtman, B., Lean, J., Matei, D., Merryfield, W. J., Muller, W. A., Pohlmann, H., Rosati, A., Wouters, B., and Wyser, K.: Real-time multi-model decadal climate predictions, Clim. Dynam., 41, 2875–2888, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-012-1600-0, 2013a.
Smith, D. M., Eade, R., and Pohlmann, H.: A comparison of full-field and anomaly initialization for seasonal to decadal climate prediction, Clim. Dynam., 41, 3325–3338, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-013-1683-2, 2013b.
Taylor, K. E., Stouffer, R. J., and Meehl, G. A.: A Summary of the CMIP5 Experiment Design, available at: http://cmip-pcmdi.llnl.gov/cmip5/docs/Taylor_CMIP5_design.pdf (last access: 14 September 2016), 2009.
Taylor, K. E., Stouffer, R. J., and Meehl, G. A.: An Overview of CMIP5 and the Experiment Design, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 93, 485–498, https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-11-00094.1, 2012.
Timmreck, C., Pohlmann, H., Illing, S., and Kadow, C.: The impact of stratospheric volcanic aerosol on decadal-scale climate predictions, Geophys. Res. Lett., 43, 834–842, https://doi.org/10.1002/2015GL067431, 2016.
Ting, M., Kushnir, Y., Seager, R., and Li, C.: Forced and internal twentieth-century SST in the North Atlantic, J. Climate, 22, 1469–1881, https://doi.org/10.1175/2008JCLI2561.1, 2009.
Troccoli, A., Harrison, M., Anderson, D., and Mason, S. (Eds.): Seasonal Climate: Forecasting and Managing Risk, Springer Science & Business Media, 467 pp., 2008.
Yeager, S., Karspeck, A., Danabasoglu, G., Tribbia, J., and Teng, H.: A decadal prediction case study: Late 20th century North Atlantic ocean heat content, J. Climate, 25, 5173–5189, https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-11-00595.1, 2012.
Zanchettin, D., Khodri, M., Timmreck, C., Toohey, M., Schmidt, A., Gerber, E. P., Hegerl, G., Robock, A., Pausata, F. S. R., Ball, W. T., Bauer, S. E., Bekki, S., Dhomse, S. S., LeGrande, A. N., Mann, G. W., Marshall, L., Mills, M., Marchand, M., Niemeier, U., Poulain, V., Rozanov, E., Rubino, A., Stenke, A., Tsigaridis, K., and Tummon, F.: The Model Intercomparison Project on the climatic response to Volcanic forcing (VolMIP): experimental design and forcing input data for CMIP6, Geosci. Model Dev., 9, 2701–2719, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-2701-2016, 2016.
Short summary
The Decadal Climate Prediction Project (DCPP) investigates our ability to skilfully predict climate variations from a year to a decade ahead by means of a series of retrospective forecasts. Quasi-real-time forecasts are also produced for potential users. In addition, the DCPP investigates how perturbations such as volcanoes affect forecasts and, more broadly, what new information can be learned about the mechanisms governing climate variations by means of case studies of past climate behaviour.
The Decadal Climate Prediction Project (DCPP) investigates our ability to skilfully predict...
