Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Coupled Model Intercomparison Project”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 253 records · Page 14
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2024

Experimental design for the Marine Ice Sheet–Ocean Model Intercomparison Project – phase 2 (MISOMIP2)

The Marine Ice Sheet–Ocean Model Intercomparison Project – phase 2 (MISOMIP2) is a natural progression of previous and ongoing model intercomparison exercises that have focused on the simulation of ice-sheet and ocean processes in Antarctica. The previous exercises motivate the move towards realistic configurations, as well as more diverse model parameters and resolutions. The main objective of MISOMIP2 is to investigate the performance of existing ocean and coupled ice-sheet–ocean models in a range of Antarctic environments through comparisons to observational data. We will assess the status of ice-sheet–ocean modelling as a community and identify common characteristics of models that are best able to capture observed features. As models are highly tuned based on present-day data, we will also compare their sensitivity to prescribed abrupt atmospheric perturbations leading to either very warm or slightly warmer ocean conditions compared to the present day. The approach of MISOMIP2 is to welcome contributions of models as they are, including global and regional configurations, but we request standardized variables and common grids for the outputs. We target the analysis at two specific regions, the Amundsen Sea and the Weddell Sea, since they describe two different ocean environments and have been relatively well observed compared to other areas of Antarctica. An observational “MIPkit” synthesizing existing ocean and ice-sheet observations for a common period is provided to evaluate ocean and ice-sheet models in these two regions.

58 GEOSCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2024

A protocol and analysis of year-long simulations of global storm-resolving models and beyond

We propose a protocol to evaluate and analyze year-long simulations of global storm-resolving models (GSRMs). The proposed protocol complements an earlier 40-day simulation protocol under the DYAMOND (DYnamics of the Atmospheric general circulation Modeled On Non-hydrostatic Domains) project to allow the analysis of the seasonal cycle and associated climatic relevant phenomena. This intercomparison aims to reveal how GSRMs, which can simulate mesoscale convective systems (MCSs) in the global domain, reproduce atmospheric large-scale structures related to convection beyond month-long simulations. The intercomparison for one-year simulations is conducted by either atmosphere-only models or atmosphere–ocean coupled models with atmospheric horizontal mesh sizes less than 5 km. We recommend the continuous four seasons from March 2020 to February 2021 as a target period for the intercomparison but with options for many groups to join more flexibly. The output variables are collected at 0.25° resolution, and archives of a small set of native grid variables are encouraged to analyze tropical cyclones and MCSs. Through the proposed global storm-resolving simulation, we will evaluate the climatological distributions of the atmospheric large-scale circulations, such as the Intertropical Convergence Zone (ITCZ), monsoon, midlatitude jets, their time evolution, and the upscale impacts on them. We present sample analyses from a one-year simulation using the 3.5 km mesh Nonhydrostatic Icosahedral Atmospheric Model (NICAM), revealing the realistic zonal contrast of tropical precipitation, no double ITCZ structure, the reasonable midlatitude jet position and intensity but a weak bias of storm track activities, and a warm bias over the Eurasia during boreal winter. We also clarify the cross-scale interaction, such as the effects of cold pools on mean precipitation over the Maritime Continent through the precipitation diurnal cycle and the effects of resolved gravity waves on midlatitude mean flows. The proposed one-year simulation protocol is referred to as the “Sendai Protocol.” This protocol is not unique or definite for evaluating GSRMs; we prospect a hierarchical set of experiments from short-term to multi-year simulations as GSRM intercomparisons.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
NASA NTRS2014

Evaluating the Dominant Components of Warming in Pliocene Climate Simulations

The Pliocene Model Intercomparison Project (PlioMIP) is the first coordinated climate model comparison for a warmer palaeoclimate with atmospheric CO2 significantly higher than pre-industrial concentrations. The simulations of the mid-Pliocene warm period show global warming of between 1.8 and 3.6 C above pre-industrial surface air temperatures, with significant polar amplification. Here we perform energy balance calculations on all eight of the coupled ocean-atmosphere simulations within PlioMIP Experiment 2 to evaluate the causes of the increased temperatures and differences between the models. In the tropics simulated warming is dominated by greenhouse gas increases, with the cloud component of planetary albedo enhancing the warming in most of the models, but by widely varying amounts. The responses to mid-Pliocene climate forcing in the Northern Hemisphere midlatitudes are substantially different between the climate models, with the only consistent response being a warming due to increased greenhouse gases. In the high latitudes all the energy balance components become important, but the dominant warming influence comes from the clear sky albedo, only partially offset by the increases in the cooling impact of cloud albedo. This demonstrates the importance of specified ice sheet and high latitude vegetation boundary conditions and simulated sea ice and snow albedo feedbacks. The largest components in the overall uncertainty are associated with clouds in the tropics and polar clear sky albedo, particularly in sea ice regions. These simulations show that albedo feedbacks, particularly those of sea ice and ice sheets, provide the most significant enhancements to high latitude warming in the Pliocene.

climate models↗
NASA NTRS1999

Soil Surface Runoff Scheme for Improving Land-Hydrology and Surface Fluxes in Simple SiB (SSiB)

Evapotranspiration on land is hard to measure and difficult to simulate. On the scale of a GCM grid, there is large subgrid-scale variability of orography, soil moisture, and vegetation. Our hope is to be able to tune the biophysical constants of vegetation and soil parameters to get the most realistic space-averaged diurnal cycle of evaporation and its climatology. Field experiments such as First ISLSCP Field Experiment (FIFE), Boreal Ecosystem-Atmosphere Study (BOREAS), and LBA help a great deal in improving our evapotranspiration schemes. However, these improvements have to be matched with, and coupled to, consistent improvement in land-hydrology; otherwise, the runoff problems will intrinsically reflect on the soil moisture and evapotranspiration errors. Indeed, a realistic runoff simulation also ensures a reasonable evapotranspiration simulation provided the precipitation forcing is reliable. We have been working on all of the above problems to improve the simulated hydrologic cycle. Through our participation in the evaluation and intercomparison of land-models under the behest of Global Soil Wetness Project (GSWP), we identified a few problems with Simple SiB (SSIB; Xue et al., 1991) hydrology in regions of significant snowmelt. Sud and Mocko (1999) show that inclusion of a separate snowpack model, with its own energy budget and fluxes with the atmosphere aloft and soil beneath, helps to ameliorate some of the deficiencies of delayed snowmelt and excessive spring season runoff. Thus, much more realistic timing of melt water generation was simulated with the new snowpack model in the subsequent GSWP re-evaluations using 2 years of ISLSCP Initiative I forcing data for 1987 and 1988. However, we noted an overcorrection of the low meltwater infiltration of SSiB. While the improvement in snowmelt timing was found everywhere, the snowmelt infiltration has became excessive in some regions, e.g., Lena river basin. This leads to much reduced runoff in many basins as compared to observations. We believe this is a consequence of neglect of the influence of subgrid-scale variations in orography that affects the production of surface runoff.

Sud, Y. C.↗
NASA NTRS2000

Predictability of the 1997 and 1998 South Asian Summer Monsoons on the Intraseasonal Time Scale Based on 10 AMIP2 Model Runs

Predictability of the 1997 and 1998 South Asian summer monsoons is examined using National Centers for Environmental Prediction/National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCEP/NCAR) reanalyses, and 100 two-year simulations with ten different Atmospheric General Circulation Models (AGCMs) with prescribed sea surface temperature (SST). We focus on the intraseasonal variations of the south Asian summer monsoon associated with the Madden-Julian Oscillation (MJO). The NCEP/NCAR reanalysis shows a clear coupling between SST anomalies and upper level velocity potential anomalies associated with the MJO. We analyze several MJO events that developed during the 1997 and 1998 focusing of the coupling with the SST. The same analysis is carried out for the model simulations. Remarkably, the ensemble mean of the two-year AGCM simulations show a signature of the observed MJO events. The ensemble mean simulated MJO events are approximately in phase with the observed events, although they are weaker, the period of oscillation is somewhat longer, and their onset is delayed by about ten days compared with the observations. Details of the analysis and comparisons among the ten AMIP2 (Atmospheric Model Intercomparison Project) models will be presented in the conference.

Wu, Man Li C.↗
NASA NTRS2018

Multidecadal Changes in the UTLS Ozone from the MERRA-2 Reanalysis and the GMI Chemistry Model

Long-term changes of ozone in the UTLS (Upper Troposphere / Lower Stratosphere) reflect the response to decreases in the stratospheric concentrations of ozone-depleting substances as well as changes in the stratospheric circulation induced by climate change. To date, studies of UTLS ozone changes and variability have relied mainly on satellite and in-situ observations as well as chemistry-climate model simulations. By comparison, the potential of reanalysis ozone data remains relatively untapped. This is despite evidence from recent studies, including detailed analyses conducted under SPARC (Scalable Processor Architecture) Reanalysis Intercomparison Project (S-RIP), that demonstrate that stratospheric ozone fields from modern atmospheric reanalyses exhibit good agreement with independent data while delineating issues related to inhomogeneities in the assimilated observations. In this presentation, we will explore the possibility of inferring long-term geographically and vertically resolved behavior of the lower stratospheric (LS) ozone from NASA's MERRA-2 (Modern-Era Retrospective Analysis for Research and Applications -2) reanalysis after accounting for the few known discontinuities and gaps in its assimilated input data. This work builds upon previous studies that have documented excellent agreement between MERRA-2 ozone and ozonesonde observations in the LS. Of particular importance is a relatively good vertical resolution of MERRA-2 allowing precise separation of tropospheric and stratospheric ozone contents. We also compare the MERRA-2 LS ozone results with the recently completed 37-year simulation produced using Goddard Earth Observing System in "replay" mode coupled with the GMI (Global Modeling Initiative) chemistry mechanism. Replay mode dynamically constrains the model with the MERRA-2 reanalysis winds, temperature, and pressure. We will emphasize the areas of agreement of the reanalysis and replay and interpret differences between them in the context of our increasing understanding of model transport driven by assimilated winds.

Ozone↗
NASA NTRS1999

Coupling Processes Between Atmospheric Chemistry and Climate

This is the final report. The overall objective of this project is to improve the understanding of coupling processes among atmospheric chemistry, aerosol and climate, all important for quantitative assessments of global change. Among our priority are changes in ozone and stratospheric sulfate aerosol, with emphasis on how ozone in the lower stratosphere would respond to natural or anthropogenic changes. The work emphasizes two important aspects: (1) AER's continued participation in preparation of, and providing scientific input for, various scientific reports connected with assessment of stratospheric ozone and climate. These include participation in various model intercomparison exercises as well as preparation of national and international reports. and (2) Continued development of the AER three-wave interactive model to address how the transport circulation will change as ozone and the thermal properties of the atmosphere change, and assess how these new findings will affect our confidence in the ozone assessment results.

Ko, Malcolm K. W.↗
NASA NTRS1999

Coupling Processes Between Atmospheric Chemistry and Climate

This is the final report for NAS5-97039 for work performed between December 1996 and November 1999. The overall objective of this project is to improve the understanding of coupling processes among atmospheric chemistry, aerosol and climate, all important for quantitative assessments of global change. Among our priority are changes in ozone and stratospheric sulfate aerosol, with emphasis on how ozone in the lower stratosphere would respond to natural or anthropogenic changes. The work emphasizes two important aspects: (1) AER's continued participation in preparation of, and providing scientific input for, various scientific reports connected with assessment of stratospheric ozone and climate. These include participation in various model intercomparison exercises as well as preparation of national and international reports. (2) Continued development of the AER three-wave interactive model to address how the transport circulation will change as ozone and the thermal properties of the atmosphere change, and assess how these new findings will affect our confidence in the ozone assessment results.

Ko, Malcolm↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Overview of the SPARC Reanalysis Intercomparison Project (S-RIP) during 2013-2020

The Stratosphere-troposphere Processes And their Role in Climate (SPARC) project is one of the four core projects of the World Climate Research Programme (WCRP). Researchers interested in SPARC use global atmospheric reanalysis products to understand a wide range of processes and variability in the atmosphere, to validate chemistry climate models, and to investigate and identify climate change. The SPARC Reanalysis Intercomparison Project (S-RIP) was initiated in 2011 and officially started in 2013 to conduct a coordinated intercomparison of all major global atmospheric reanalysis data sets. The S-RIP has been aiming at writing up an assessment report in the SPARC report series (to be published by the end of 2020) (1) on overall quality of temperature, winds, ozone, and water vapor data, (2) on more process- and region-oriented evaluation of the Brewer–Dobson circulation, extratropical stratosphere-troposphere coupling, extratropical upper troposphere and lower stratosphere, the tropical tropopause layer, the quasi-biennial oscillation, polar processes, and the upper stratosphere and lower mesosphere, and (3) with a coordinated description of the reanalysis systems. We also have an inter-journal special issue on "The SPARC Reanalysis Intercomparison Project (S-RIP)" in Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics (ACP) and Earth System Science Data (ESSD). In the presentation, we will discuss key findings and recommendations as well as the evaluation of this rst phase of the S-RIP activity.

Masatomo Fujiwara↗
NASA NTRS2003

Status of Middle Atmosphere-Climate Models: Results SPARC-GRIPS

The middle atmosphere is an important component of the climate system, primarily because of the radiative forcing of ozone. Middle atmospheric ozone can change, over long times, because of changes in the abundance of anthropogenic pollutants which catalytically destroy it, and because of the temperature sensitivity of kinetic reaction rates. There is thus a complex interaction between ozone, involving chemical and climatic mechanisms. One question of interest is how ozone will change over the next decades , as the "greenhouse-gas cooling" of the middle atmosphere increases but the concentrations of chlorine species decreases (because of policy changes). concerns the climate biases in current middle atmosphere-climate models, especially their ability to simulate the correct seasonal cycle at high latitudes, and the existence of temperature biases in the global mean. A major obstacle when addressing this question This paper will present a summary of recent results from the "GCM-Reality Intercomparison Project for SPARC" (GRIPS) initiative. A set of middle atmosphere-climate models has been compared, identifying common biases. Mechanisms for these biases are being studied in some detail, including off-line assessments of the radiation transfer codes and coordinated studies of the impacts of gravity wave drag due to sub-grid-scale processes. ensemble of models will be presented, along with numerical experiments undertaken with one or more models, designed to investigate the mechanisms at work in the atmosphere. The discussion will focus on dynamical and radiative mechanisms in the current climate, but implications for coupled ozone chemistry and the future climate will be assessed.

Pawson, Steven↗
NASA NTRS2019

A Crop Yield Change Emulator for Use in GCAM and Similar Models: Persephone v1.0

Future changes in Earth system state will impact agricultural yields and, through these changed yields, can have profound impacts on the global economy. Global gridded crop models estimate the influence of these Earth system changes on future crop yields but are often too computationally intensive to dynamically couple into global multisector economic models, such as the Global Change Assessment Model (GCAM) and other similar-in-scale models. Yet, generalizing a faster site-specific crop model’s results to be used globally will introduce inaccuracies, and the question of which model to use is unclear given the wide variation in yield response across crop models. To examine the feedback loop among socioeconomics, Earth system changes, and crop yield changes, rapidly generated yield responses with some quantification of crop response uncertainty are desirable. The Persephone v1.0 response functions presented in this work are based on the Agricultural Model Intercomparison and Improvement Project (AgMIP) Coordinated Climate-Crop Modeling Project (C3MP) sensitivity test data set and are focused on providing GCAM and similar models with a tractable number of rapid to evaluate dynamic yield response functions corresponding to a range of the yield response sensitivities seen in the C3MP data set. With the Persephone response functions, a new variety of agricultural impact experiments will be open to GCAM and other economic models: for example, examining the economic impacts of a multi-year drought in a key agricultural region and how economic changes in response to the drought can, in turn, impact the drought.

Snyder, Abigail↗
NASA NTRS2017

WCRP Task Team for the Intercomparison of Reanalyses (TIRA): Motivation and Progress

Reanalyses have proven to be an important resource for weather and climate related research, as well as societal applications at large. Several centers have emerged to produce new atmospheric reanalyses in various forms every few years. In addition, land and ocean communities are producing disciplinary uncoupled reanalyses. Current research and development in reanalysis is directed at (1) extending the length of reanalyzed period and (2) use of coupled Earth system models for climate reanalysis. While WCRPs involvement in the reanalyses communities through its Data Advisory Council (WDAC) has been substantial, for example in organizing international conferences on reanalyses, a central team of reanalyses expertise is not in place in the WCRP structure. The differences among reanalyses and their inherent uncertainties are some of the most important questions for both users and developers of reanalyses. Therefore, a collaborative effort to systematically assess and intercompare reanalyses would be a logical progression that fills the needs of the community and contributes to the WCRP mission. The primary charge to the TIRA is to develop a reanalysis intercomparison project plan that will attain the following objectives.1)To foster understanding and estimation of uncertainties in reanalysis data by intercomparison and other means 2)To communicate new developments and best practices among the reanalyses producing centers 3)To enhance the understanding of data and assimilation issues and their impact on uncertainties, leading to improved reanalyses for climate assessment 4)To communicate the strengths and weaknesses of reanalyses, their fitness for purpose, and best practices in the use of reanalysis datasets by the scientific community. This presentation outlines the need for a task team on reanalyses, their intercomparison, the objectives of the team and progress thus far.

WDA↗
NASA NTRS2018

WCRP Task Team for the Intercomparison of ReAnalyses (TIRA): Motivation and Progress

Reanalyses have proven to be an important resource for weather and climate related research, as well as societal applications at large. New atmospheric reanalyses in various forms are produced every few years. In addition, land and ocean communities are producing disciplinary uncoupled reanalyses, and regional reanalyses are emerging in addition to global reanalyses. Systems of data information are being developed to facilitate the intercomparison of reanalyses among themselves and with observations and climate change experiments (e.g. CREATE-IP and WRIT). Current research and development in reanalysis is directed at (1) extending the length of reanalyzed period and (2) use of coupled Earth system models for climate reanalysis. While the World Climate Research Programme (WCRP) involvement in the reanalyses communities through its Data Advisory Council (WDAC) has been substantial, for example in organizing international conferences on reanalyses. However, these efforts have previously not included an analysis of the differences among reanalyses and their inherent uncertainties which are important questions for both users and developers of reanalyses. Therefore, the WCRP Task Team for the Intercomparison of ReAnalyses (TIRA) task team has been formed as collaborative effort to address reanalyses role in WCRP. This constitutes a logical progression that fills the needs of the community and contributes to the WCRP mission. The primary charge to TIRA is to develop a reanalysis intercomparison project plan that will attain the following objectives.1)To foster understanding and estimation of uncertainties in reanalysis data by intercomparison and other means)To communicate new developments and best practices among the reanalyses producing centers3)To enhance the understanding of data and assimilation issues and their impact on uncertainties, leading to improved reanalyses for climate assessment4)To communicate the strengths and weaknesses of reanalyses, their fitness for purpose, and best practices in the use of reanalysis datasets by the scientific communityThis contribution outlines the need for a task team on reanalyses, their intercomparison, the objectives of the team and progress thus far. Results for some pilot intercomparisons will also be discussed.

Bosilovich, Michael↗
NASA NTRS1994

The scale and persistence of soil moisture anomalies as simulated in a global model

Short term variability of climate is intimately connected with soil moisture variability. Soil moisture provides the storage and subsequent return to the atmosphere, through evaporation and transpiration, of precipitation anomalies over land. Global Circulation Model (GCM) simulations enable consistent identification of correlations and dynamical connections between the hydrologic variables, many of which are incompletely observed. One way to facilitate understanding with these increasingly intricate models is to perform sensitivity studies in which a boundary condition or process is prescribed. In this study we will report on a sensitivity study in which a GCM with a sophisticated land surface representation is used to investigate soil moisture variability in the model climate. The simulations to be used in this study were made at R15 resolution (approximately 4.5 deg latitude x 7.5 deg longitude) with prescribed sea surface temperatures (SST) in the GENESIS model (Thompson and Pollard, 1994), which is coupled to a Land Surface Transfer model (LSX) at 2 deg x 2 deg resolution (Pollard and Thompson, 1994). All the results represented here were taken from the monthly averages of the model results. The LSX model accounts for the physical effects of vegetation with two layers specified at each grid point. Vegetation attributes such as leaf area indices, fractional cover, leaf albedos, etc., were taken from the global dataset in Dorman and Sellers (1989). A six-layer soil model extends from the surface to 4.25 m depth. SST's were prescribed in two ten year experiments using monthly SST values with the daily value being interpolated from the nearest two months. In the first experiment monthly climatological values were used, and in the second, the Atmospheric Model Intercomparison Project (AMIP) observed SST's for the years 1979 through 1988 were used (Gates, 1992). Thus, the former experiment gives a measure of the intrinsic model variability, to be compared with that of the latter experiment, which includes month-to-month variability due to ocean forcing.

Fitzjarrald, D.↗
NASA NTRS2013

Simulations of the Mid-Pliocene Warm Period Using Two Versions of the NASA-GISS ModelE2-R Coupled Model

The mid-Pliocene Warm Period (mPWP) bears many similarities to aspects of future global warming as projected by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC, 2007). Both marine and terrestrial data point to high-latitude temperature amplification, including large decreases in sea ice and land ice, as well as expansion of warmer climate biomes into higher latitudes. Here we present our most recent simulations of the mid-Pliocene climate using the CMIP5 version of the NASAGISS Earth System Model (ModelE2-R). We describe the substantial impact associated with a recent correction made in the implementation of the Gent-McWilliams ocean mixing scheme (GM), which has a large effect on the simulation of ocean surface temperatures, particularly in the North Atlantic Ocean. The effect of this correction on the Pliocene climate results would not have been easily determined from examining its impact on the preindustrial runs alone, a useful demonstration of how the consequences of code improvements as seen in modern climate control runs do not necessarily portend the impacts in extreme climates.Both the GM-corrected and GM-uncorrected simulations were contributed to the Pliocene Model Intercomparison Project (PlioMIP) Experiment 2. Many findings presented here corroborate results from other PlioMIP multi-model ensemble papers, but we also emphasize features in the ModelE2-R simulations that are unlike the ensemble means. The corrected version yields results that more closely resemble the ocean core data as well as the PRISM3D reconstructions of the mid-Pliocene, especially the dramatic warming in the North Atlantic and Greenland-Iceland-Norwegian Sea, which in the new simulation appears to be far more realistic than previously found with older versions of the GISS model. Our belief is that continued development of key physical routines in the atmospheric model, along with higher resolution and recent corrections to mixing parameterisations in the ocean model, have led to an Earth System Model that will produce more accurate projections of future climate.

climate change↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

A11I-2104 Evaluation of the NASA GEOS Chemistry-Climate Model Coupled Atmosphere-Ocean Configuration for its Suitability to Simulations of Atmospheric Composition in a Changing Climate

The NASA Goddard Earth Observing System Chemistry-Climate Model (GEOSCCM) is a full tropospheric-stratospheric chemistry enabled configuration of the NASA GEOS Earth system model. Among the objectives for research performed with GEOSCCM is to understand the impacts of climate change on recovery of the stratospheric ozone layer over the twenty-first century. Simulations performed in the past with GEOSCCM did not have an interactive ocean and were driven with projected sea surface temperature and sea ice boundary conditions provided by external models. This method limits the application of GEOSCCM for climate study because it doesn’t allow the feedback of composition changes to ocean. For a full representation of the chemistry-climate feedbacks in the Earth System, we have developed a configuration of GEOSCCM that makes use of the MOM5 ocean general circulation model coupled to the GEOS atmospheric general circulation model. This configuration leverages development of the GEOS Sub-seasonal-to-Seasonal (S2S) prediction system, and includes interactive, radiatively coupled aerosols and two-moment, aerosol-aware cloud microphysics. W e have assessed the baseline model climate sensitivity with an Monday, 11 December 2023 08:30 - 12:50 Poster Hall A-C - South (Exhibition Level, South, MC) experiment performed under pre-industrial (e.g., year 1850) greenhouse gas conditions and a second experiment under 4xCO2 conditions, similar to the typical CMIP protocol. The GEOS model is demonstrated to have a climate sensitivity of a 2.6 K increase in global mean surface temperature for an equivalent doubling of CO2 from pre-industrial conditions, in line with current CMIP models. This configuration of the GEOS model is suitable for application to multidecadal to century-long simulations of climate system response to changing greenhouse gas levels. We report here our evaluation of the climate diagnostics of this configuration and discuss future directions for work with this model configuration, including an ongoing twenty-first century projection experiment based on the Chemistry-Climate Model Intercomparison project protocol.

models↗
NASA NTRS2016

Connecting Paleo and Modern Oceanographic Data to Understand Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation Over Decades to Centuries

Modeling is an important tool for understanding AMOC on all timescales. Mechanistic studies of modern AMOC variability have been hampered by a lack of consistency between free-running models and the sensitivity of AMOC to resolution and parameterization. Recent work within the framework of the phase two Coordinated Ocean- Reference Experiments (CORE-II) addresses this issue head on, looking at model differences of AMOC mean state and interannual variability. One consistent feature across the models is that AMOC mean transport is related to mixed layer depths and Labrador Sea salt content, whereas interannual variability is primarily associated with Labrador Sea temperature anomalies. This is consistent with the hypothesized importance of salt balance for AMOC variability on geological timescales. The simulated relationships between AMOC and subsurface temperature anomalies in fully coupled climate models reveal subsurface AMOC fingerprints that could be used to reconstruct historical AMOC variations at low frequency.With the lack of long-term AMOC observations, models of ocean state that assimilate observational data have been explored as a way to reconstruct AMOC, but comparisons between models indicate they are quite variable in their AMOC representations. Karspeck et al. (2015) found that historical reconstructions of AMOC in such models are sensitive to the details of the data assimilation procedure. The ocean data assimilation community continues to address these issues through improved models and methods for estimating and representing error information.Two objectives of paleoclimate modeling are 1) to provide mechanistic information for interpretation of paleoclimate observations, and 2) to test the ability of predictive models to simulate Earth's climate under different background forcing states. In a good example of the first objective, Schmittner and Lund (2015) and Menviel et al. (2014) provided key information about the proxy signals expected under freshwater disturbance of AMOC, which were used to support the paleoclimate observations made by Henry et al. (2016). In an example of the second objective, Muglia and Schmittner (2015) analyzed Third Paleoclimate Modeling Intercomparison Project (PMIP3) models of the Last Glacial Maximum (LGM) and found consistently more intense and deeper AMOC transports relative to preindustrial simulations, counter to the paleoclimate consensus of LGM conditions, indicating that some processes are not well represented in the PMIP3 models. One challenge is to find adequate paleo observations against which to test these models. PMIP is now in phase 4 (part of CMIP6), which includes experiments covering five periods in Earth's history: the last millennium, last glacial maximum, last interglacial, and the mid-Pliocene. Newly compiled paleoclimate datasets from the PAGES2k project, more transient simulations, and participation of isotope enabled models planned for CMIP6PMIP4 will enable richer paleo data-model comparisons in the near future.

Kilbourne, Hali↗
NASA NTRS2017

The Cloud Feedback Model Intercomparison Project (CFMIP) contribution to CMIP6.

The primary objective of CFMIP is to inform future assessments of cloud feedbacks through improved understanding of cloud-climate feedback mechanisms and better evaluation of cloud processes and cloud feedbacks in climate models. However, the CFMIP approach is also increasingly being used to understand other aspects of climate change, and so a second objective has now been introduced, to improve understanding of circulation, regional-scale precipitation, and non-linear changes. CFMIP is supporting ongoing model inter-comparison activities by coordinating a hierarchy of targeted experiments for CMIP6, along with a set of cloud-related output diagnostics. CFMIP contributes primarily to addressing the CMIP6 questions 'How does the Earth system respond to forcing?' and 'What are the origins and consequences of systematic model biases?' and supports the activities of the WCRP Grand Challenge on Clouds, Circulation and Climate Sensitivity. A compact set of Tier 1 experiments is proposed for CMIP6 to address this question: (1) what are the physical mechanisms underlying the range of cloud feedbacks and cloud adjustments predicted by climate models, and which models have the most credible cloud feedbacks? Additional Tier 2 experiments are proposed to address the following questions. (2) Are cloud feedbacks consistent for climate cooling and warming, and if not, why? (3) How do cloud-radiative effects impact the structure, the strength and the variability of the general atmospheric circulation in present and future climates? (4) How do responses in the climate system due to changes in solar forcing differ from changes due to CO2, and is the response sensitive to the sign of the forcing? (5) To what extent is regional climate change per CO2 doubling state-dependent (non-linear), and why? (6) Are climate feedbacks during the 20th century different to those acting on long-term climate change and climate sensitivity? (7) How do regional climate responses (e.g. in precipitation) and their uncertainties in coupled models arise from the combination of different aspects of CO2 forcing and sea surface warming? CFMIP also proposes a number of additional model outputs in the CMIP DECK, CMIP6 Historical and CMIP6 CFMIP experiments, including COSP simulator outputs and process diagnostics to address the following questions. 1. How well do clouds and other relevant variables simulated by models agree with observations? 2. What physical processes and mechanisms are important for a credible simulation of clouds, cloud feedbacks and cloud adjustments in climate models? 3. Which models have the most credible representations of processes relevant to the simulation of clouds? 4. How do clouds and their changes interact with other elements of the climate system?

carbon dioxide↗