Articles | Volume 9, issue 11
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-4019-2016
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-4019-2016
Model experiment description paper
 | 
09 Nov 2016
Model experiment description paper |  | 09 Nov 2016

nonlinMIP contribution to CMIP6: model intercomparison project for non-linear mechanisms: physical basis, experimental design and analysis principles (v1.0)

Peter Good, Timothy Andrews, Robin Chadwick, Jean-Louis Dufresne, Jonathan M. Gregory, Jason A. Lowe, Nathalie Schaller, and Hideo Shiogama

Related authors

Historical and future changes in air pollutants from CMIP6 models
Steven T. Turnock, Robert J. Allen, Martin Andrews, Susanne E. Bauer, Makoto Deushi, Louisa Emmons, Peter Good, Larry Horowitz, Jasmin G. John, Martine Michou, Pierre Nabat, Vaishali Naik, David Neubauer, Fiona M. O'Connor, Dirk Olivié, Naga Oshima, Michael Schulz, Alistair Sellar, Sungbo Shim, Toshihiko Takemura, Simone Tilmes, Kostas Tsigaridis, Tongwen Wu, and Jie Zhang
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 20, 14547–14579, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-14547-2020,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-14547-2020, 2020
Short summary
Climate and air quality impacts due to mitigation of non-methane near-term climate forcers
Robert J. Allen, Steven Turnock, Pierre Nabat, David Neubauer, Ulrike Lohmann, Dirk Olivié, Naga Oshima, Martine Michou, Tongwen Wu, Jie Zhang, Toshihiko Takemura, Michael Schulz, Kostas Tsigaridis, Susanne E. Bauer, Louisa Emmons, Larry Horowitz, Vaishali Naik, Twan van Noije, Tommi Bergman, Jean-Francois Lamarque, Prodromos Zanis, Ina Tegen, Daniel M. Westervelt, Philippe Le Sager, Peter Good, Sungbo Shim, Fiona O'Connor, Dimitris Akritidis, Aristeidis K. Georgoulias, Makoto Deushi, Lori T. Sentman, Jasmin G. John, Shinichiro Fujimori, and William J. Collins
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 20, 9641–9663, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-9641-2020,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-9641-2020, 2020
Correcting a bias in a climate model with an augmented emulator
Doug McNeall, Jonny Williams, Richard Betts, Ben Booth, Peter Challenor, Peter Good, and Andy Wiltshire
Geosci. Model Dev., 13, 2487–2509, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-2487-2020,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-2487-2020, 2020
Short summary
The Cloud Feedback Model Intercomparison Project (CFMIP) contribution to CMIP6
Mark J. Webb, Timothy Andrews, Alejandro Bodas-Salcedo, Sandrine Bony, Christopher S. Bretherton, Robin Chadwick, Hélène Chepfer, Hervé Douville, Peter Good, Jennifer E. Kay, Stephen A. Klein, Roger Marchand, Brian Medeiros, A. Pier Siebesma, Christopher B. Skinner, Bjorn Stevens, George Tselioudis, Yoko Tsushima, and Masahiro Watanabe
Geosci. Model Dev., 10, 359–384, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-10-359-2017,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-10-359-2017, 2017
Short summary

Related subject area

Climate and Earth system modeling
A sub-grid parameterization scheme for topographic vertical motion in CAM5-SE
Yaqi Wang, Lanning Wang, Juan Feng, Zhenya Song, Qizhong Wu, and Huaqiong Cheng
Geosci. Model Dev., 16, 6857–6873, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-6857-2023,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-6857-2023, 2023
Short summary
Technology to aid the analysis of large-volume multi-institute climate model output at a central analysis facility (PRIMAVERA Data Management Tool V2.10)
Jon Seddon, Ag Stephens, Matthew S. Mizielinski, Pier Luigi Vidale, and Malcolm J. Roberts
Geosci. Model Dev., 16, 6689–6700, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-6689-2023,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-6689-2023, 2023
Short summary
A diffusion-based kernel density estimator (diffKDE, version 1) with optimal bandwidth approximation for the analysis of data in geoscience and ecological research
Maria-Theresia Pelz, Markus Schartau, Christopher J. Somes, Vanessa Lampe, and Thomas Slawig
Geosci. Model Dev., 16, 6609–6634, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-6609-2023,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-6609-2023, 2023
Short summary
Monte Carlo drift correction – quantifying the drift uncertainty of global climate models
Benjamin S. Grandey, Zhi Yang Koh, Dhrubajyoti Samanta, Benjamin P. Horton, Justin Dauwels, and Lock Yue Chew
Geosci. Model Dev., 16, 6593–6608, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-6593-2023,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-6593-2023, 2023
Short summary
Improvements in the Canadian Earth System Model (CanESM) through systematic model analysis: CanESM5.0 and CanESM5.1
Michael Sigmond, James Anstey, Vivek Arora, Ruth Digby, Nathan Gillett, Viatcheslav Kharin, William Merryfield, Catherine Reader, John Scinocca, Neil Swart, John Virgin, Carsten Abraham, Jason Cole, Nicolas Lambert, Woo-Sung Lee, Yongxiao Liang, Elizaveta Malinina, Landon Rieger, Knut von Salzen, Christian Seiler, Clint Seinen, Andrew Shao, Reinel Sospedra-Alfonso, Libo Wang, and Duo Yang
Geosci. Model Dev., 16, 6553–6591, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-6553-2023,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-6553-2023, 2023
Short summary

Cited articles

Allen, M. R. and Ingram, W. J.: Constraints on future changes in climate and the hydrologic cycle, Nature, 419, 224–232, https://doi.org/10.1038/nature01092, 2002.
Andrews, T. and Ringer, M. A.: Cloud feedbacks, rapid adjustments, and the forcing-response relationship in a transient CO2 reversibility scenario, J. Climate, 27, 1799–1818, https://doi.org/10.1175/Jcli-D-13-00421.1, 2014.
Andrews, T., Forster, P. M., Boucher, O., Bellouin, N., and Jones, A.: Precipitation, radiative forcing and global temperature change, Geophys. Res. Lett., 37, L14701, https://doi.org/10.1029/2010gl043991, 2010.
Bala, G., Caldeira, K., and Nemani, R.: Fast versus slow response in climate change: Implications for the global hydrological cycle, Clim. Dynam., 35, 423–434, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-009-0583-y, 2010.
Bloch-Johnson, J., Pierrehumbert, R. T., and Abbot, D. S.: Feedback temperature dependence determines the risk of high warming, Geophys. Res. Lett., 42, 4973–4980, https://doi.org/10.1002/2015GL064240, 2015.
Download
Short summary
The nonlinMIP model intercomparison project is described. nonlinMIP provides experiments that account for state-dependent regional and global climate responses. The experiments have two main applications: 1) to focus understanding of responses to CO2 forcing on states relevant to specific policy or scientific questions (e.g. change under low-forcing scenarios, the benefits of mitigation, or from past cold climates to the present day), or 2) to understand state dependence of climate responses.