Observations for Model Intercomparison Project (Obs4MIPs): status for CMIP6
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Duane Waliser↗
SEARCH · Search NASA
Results for “Model intercomparison”
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.
Modeling Gaps in Continental-Scale Snow Estimation as Highlighted by Land Surface Model Intercomparison
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Melissa Wrzesien↗
CoCoMET v1.0: a unified open-source toolkit for atmospheric object tracking and analysis
Advances in performance and analysis capabilities have accelerated the development of object tracking algorithms for atmospheric research. This has resulted in a growing number of studies using Lagrangian tracking techniques to analyze the evolution of atmospheric phenomena and the underlying processes. However, the increasing complexity and variety of tracking algorithms present a steep learning curve for new users and make it difficult for existing users to compare algorithm performance. We introduce CoCoMET (Community Cloud Model Evaluation Toolkit), an open-source toolkit that addresses these issues. CoCoMET simplifies the process of running multiple tracking algorithms simultaneously and analyzing objects in both model and observational datasets by specifying parameters in a single configuration file. It standardizes input data from different sources into a consistent format and unifies the tracking output across algorithms. CoCoMET enhances the functionality of existing tracking methods by calculating additional properties such as cell growth and dissipation rates, perimeter, surface area, convexity, and irregularity. In addition, CoCoMET includes a novel method for identifying mergers and splits in 2D and 3D tracks and supports the integration of Eulerian/stationary datasets external to the tracking data for process studies. Its potential utility is demonstrated through examples of model intercomparison, model evaluation against observations, and comparisons between tracking algorithms. Designed for open-source environments, CoCoMET will continue to expand with future releases, incorporating more input data types and tracking algorithms.
54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
Climate impacts in scenarios: time to close the loop?
Reaching a full understanding of the consequences of climate change for society and ecosystems, and the ensuing needs for adaptation, requires a consideration of the interactions between human and Earth systems. Currently, however, climate research largely separates the influence of society on climate from the influence of climate on society; that is, it doesn’t “close the loop.” A primary example of this approach is the generation and use of earth system model (ESM) simulations in the climate change research community. Large-scale socio-economic models, known as integrated assessment models (IAMs), are used to project emissions and land use change which serve as input to ESMs. ESM projections then serve as input to models of impacts on society and ecosystems. But, according to this modeling chain, those impacts do not affect the emissions and land use that drove the ESMs in the first place. Previous work has not drawn firm conclusions on whether this feedback would be large enough to warrant explicitly accounting for it. Two prominent possibilities, however, are that emissions and land use scenarios representing the high and low ends of the plausible range of future climate change are both too extreme. The high-end scenario may miss damaging impacts that would reduce economic activity, and therefore emissions, while the low-end scenario may ignore climate feedbacks that would make large-scale land-based carbon removal ineffective and therefore would hamper mitigation at the level assumed by the scenario. In this piece, we identify the opportunities and challenges that implementing such feedback loops would face. We argue that recent developments in climate impact research, human system modeling and ESM emulation make the time ripe to use IAMs in a structured model intercomparison exercise. Model intercomparison projects have benefitted the climate modeling community for decade snow, and more recently have also benefitted the impact modeling community. An IAM intercomparison focused on integrating impacts could make large strides in testing the implications of these feedbacks and assessing whether closing the loop would fundamentally change our outlook on future climate changes and their consequences.
Tebaldi, Claudia↗
Ringberg15: Earth's Climate Sensitivities
To assess gaps in understanding of Earth's climate sensitivities a workshop was organised under the auspices of the WCRP (World Climate Research Programme) Grand Science Challenge on Clouds, Circulation and Climate Sensitivity (Ringberg15). The workshop took place in March 2015 and gathered together over thirty experts from around the world for one week. Attendees each gave short presentations and participated in moderated discussions of specific questions related to understanding Earth's climate sensitivities. Most of the time was focused on understanding of the equilibrium climate sensitivity, defined as the equilibrium near-surface warming associated with a doubling of atmospheric carbon dioxide. The workshop produced nine recommendations, many of them focusing on specific research avenues that could be exploited to advance understanding of climate sensitivity. Many of these dealt, in one fashion or another, with the need to more sharply focus research on identifying and testing story lines for a high (larger than 4 degrees Kelvin) or low (less than 2 degrees Kelvin) equilibrium climate sensitivity. Additionally, a subset of model intercomparison projects (CFMIP (Cloud Feedback Model Intercomparison Project), PMIP (Palaeoclimate Modelling Intercomparison Project), PDRMIP (Precipitation Driver and Response Model Intercomparison Project), RFMIP (Radiative Forcing Model Intercomparison Project) and VolMIP (Volcanic Forcings Model Intercomparison Project)) that have been proposed for inclusion within CMIP were identified as being central to resolving important issues raised at the workshop; for this reason modelling groups were strongly encouraged to participate in these projects. Finally the workshop participants encouraged the WCRP to initiate and support an assessment process lead by the Grand Science Challenge on Clouds, Circulation and Climate Sensitivity on the topic of Earth's Climate Sensitivities, culminating in a report that will be published in 2019, forty years after the seminal report by Charney and co-authors.
Sensitivity↗
Models and Measurements Intercomparison 2
Models and Measurement Intercomparison II (MM II) summarizes the intercomparison of results from model simulations and observations of stratospheric species. Representatives from twenty-three modeling groups using twenty-nine models participated in these MM II exercises between 1996 and 1999. Twelve of the models were two- dimensional zonal-mean models while seventeen were three-dimensional models. This was an international effort as seven were from outside the United States. Six transport experiments and five chemistry experiments were designed for various models. Models participating in the transport experiments performed simulations of chemically inert tracers providing diagnostics for transport. The chemistry experiments involved simulating the distributions of chemically active trace cases including ozone. The model run conditions for dynamics and chemistry were prescribed in order to minimize the factors that caused differences in the models. The report includes a critical review of the results by the participants and a discussion of the causes of differences between modeled and measured results as well as between results from different models, A sizable effort went into preparation of the database of the observations. This included a new climatology for ozone. The report should help in evaluating the results from various predictive models for assessing humankind perturbations of the stratosphere.
Park, Jae H.↗
Long-Term Changes in Lower Tropospheric Baseline Ozone Concentrations:
Two recent papers have quantified long-term ozone (O3) changes observed at northernmidlatitude sites that are believed to represent baseline (here understood as representative of continental to hemispheric scales) conditions. Three chemistry-climate models (NCAR CAM-chem, GFDL-CM3, and GISS-E2-R) have calculated retrospective tropospheric O3 concentrations as part of the Atmospheric Chemistry and Climate Model Intercomparison Project and Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 5 model intercomparisons. We present an approach for quantitative comparisons of model results with measurements for seasonally averaged O3 concentrations. There is considerable qualitative agreement between the measurements and the models, but there are also substantial and consistent quantitative disagreements. Most notably, models (1) overestimate absolute O3 mixing ratios, on average by approximately 5 to 17 ppbv in the year 2000, (2) capture only approximately 50% of O3 changes observed over the past five to six decades, and little of observed seasonal differences, and (3) capture approximately 25 to 45% of the rate of change of the long-term changes. These disagreements are significant enough to indicate that only limited confidence can be placed on estimates of present-day radiative forcing of tropospheric O3 derived from modeled historic concentration changes and on predicted future O3 concentrations. Evidently our understanding of tropospheric O3, or the incorporation of chemistry and transport processes into current chemical climate models, is incomplete. Modeled O3 trends approximately parallel estimated trends in anthropogenic emissions of NO(sub x), an important O3 precursor, while measured O3 changes increase more rapidly than these emission estimates.
atmospheric composition↗
Evaluation of Intercomparisons of Four Different Types of Model Simulating TWP-ICE
Four model intercomparisons were run and evaluated using the TWP-ICE field campaign, each involving different types of atmospheric model. Here we highlight what can be learnt from having single-column model (SCM), cloud-resolving model (CRM), global atmosphere model (GAM) and limited-area model (LAM) intercomparisons all based around the same field campaign. We also make recommendations for anyone planning further large multi-model intercomparisons to ensure they are of maximum value to the model development community. CRMs tended to match observations better than other model types, although there were exceptions such as outgoing long-wave radiation. All SCMs grew large temperature and moisture biases and performed worse than other model types for many diagnostics. The GAMs produced a delayed and significantly reduced peak in domain-average rain rate when compared to the observations. While it was shown that this was in part due to the analysis used to drive these models, the LAMs were also driven by this analysis and did not have the problem to the same extent. Based on differences between the models with parametrized convection (SCMs and GAMs) and those without (CRMs and LAMs), we speculate that that having explicit convection helps to constrain liquid water whereas the ice contents are controlled more by the representation of the microphysics.
convection↗
The PMIP4 Contribution to CMIP6 - Part 1: Overview and Over-Arching Analysis Plan
This paper is the first of a series of four GMD (Geoscientific Model Development) papers on the PMIP4-CMIP6 (Paleoclimate Modelling Intercomparison Project - Phase 4 -- Coupled Model Intercomparison Project - Phase 6) experiments. Part 2 (Otto-Bliesner et al., 2017) gives details about the two PMIP4-CMIP6 interglacial experiments, Part 3 (Jungclaus et al., 2017) about the last millennium experiment, and Part 4 (Kageyama et al., 2017) about the Last Glacial Maximum experiment. The mid-Pliocene Warm Period experiment is part of the Pliocene Model Intercomparison Project (PlioMIP) - Phase 2, detailed in Haywood et al. (2016). The goal of the Paleoclimate Modelling Intercomparison Project (PMIP) is to understand the response of the climate system to different climate forcings for documented climatic states very different from the present and historical climates. Through comparison with observations of the environmental impact of these climate changes, or with climate reconstructions based on physical, chemical, or biological records, PMIP also addresses the issue of how well state-of-the-art numerical models simulate climate change. Climate models are usually developed using the present and historical climates as references, but climate projections show that future climates will lie well outside these conditions. Palaeoclimates very different from these reference states therefore provide stringent tests for state-of-the-art models and a way to assess whether their sensitivity to forcings is compatible with palaeoclimatic evidence. Simulations of five different periods have been designed to address the objectives of the sixth phase of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP6): the millennium prior to the industrial epoch (CMIP6 name: past1000); the mid-Holocene, 6000 years ago (midHolocene); the Last Glacial Maximum, 21,000 years ago (lgm); the Last Interglacial, 127,000 years ago (lig127k); and the mid-Pliocene Warm Period, 3.2 million years ago (midPliocene-eoi400). These climatic periods are well documented by palaeoclimatic and palaeoenvironmental records, with climate and environmental changes relevant for the study and projection of future climate changes. This paper describes the motivation for the choice of these periods and the design of the numerical experiments and database requests, with a focus on their novel features compared to the experiments performed in previous phases of PMIP and CMIP. It also outlines the analysis plan that takes advantage of the comparisons of the results across periods and across CMIP6 in collaboration with other MIPs.
climate↗
An Intercomparison of 2-D Models Within a Common Framework
A model intercomparison among the Atmospheric and Environmental Research (AER) 2-D model, the Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC) 2-D model, and the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory 2-D model allows us to separate differences due to model transport from those due to the model's chemical formulation. This is accomplished by constructing two hybrid models incorporating the transport parameters of the GSFC and LLNL models within the AER model framework. By comparing the results from the native models (AER and e.g. GSFC) with those from the hybrid model (e.g. AER chemistry with GSFC transport), differences due to chemistry and transport can be identified. For the analysis, we examined an inert tracer whose emission pattern is based on emission from a High Speed Civil Transport (HSCT) fleet; distributions of trace species in the 2015 atmosphere; and the response of stratospheric ozone to an HSCT fleet. Differences in NO(y) in the upper stratosphere are found between models with identical transport, implying different model representations of atmospheric chemical processes. The response of O3 concentration to HSCT aircraft emissions differs in the models from both transport-dominated differences in the HSCT-induced perturbations of H2O and NO(y) as well as from differences in the model represent at ions of O3 chemical processes. The model formulations of cold polar processes are found to be the most significant factor in creating large differences in the calculated ozone perturbations
Weisenstein, Debra K.↗
Merged Observatory Data Files (MODFs): an integrated observational data product supporting process-oriented investigations and diagnostics
A large and ever-growing body of geophysical information is measured in campaigns and at specialized observatories as a part of scientific expeditions and experiments. These collections of observed data include many essential climate variables (as defined by the Global Climate Observing System) but are often distinguished by a wide range of additional non-routine measurements that are designed to not only document the state of the environment but also the drivers that contribute to that state. These field data are used not only to further understand environmental processes through observation-based studies but also to provide baseline data to test model performance and to codify understanding to improve predictive capabilities. To address the considerable barriers and difficulty in utilizing these diverse and complex data for observation–model research, the Merged Observatory Data File (MODF) concept has been developed. A MODF combines measurements from multiple instruments into a single file that complies with well-established data format and metadata practices and has been designed to parallel the development of corresponding Merged Model Data Files (MMDFs). Using the MODF and MMDF protocols will facilitate the evolution of model intercomparison projects into model intercomparison and improvement projects by putting observation and model data “on the same page” in a timely manner. The MODF concept was developed especially for weather forecast model studies in the Arctic. The surprisingly complex process of implementing MODFs in that context refined the concept itself. Thus, this article explains the concept of MODFs by providing details on the issues that were revealed and resolved during that first specific implementation. Detailed instructions are provided on how to make MODFs, and this article can be considered a MODF creation manual.
54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
Machine Learning Emulators and Empirical Models Combining Climate and Global Crop Models for Seasonal Agricultural Production
We present results from several connected efforts to apply machine learning methods to estimates of seasonal agricultural production anomalies around the world. First, we apply the XGBoost Random Forest method to fit emulators that mimic global crop models participating in the Agricultural Model Intercomparison and Improvement Project (AgMIP) Global Gridded Crop Model Intercomparison (GGCMI). These are the same models used in the agricultural sector simulations of the Inter-Sectoral Impacts Model Intercomparison Project (ISIMIP). These emulators use 8 climate variables split across 5 sub-seasonal representations of the growing season for each ½ degree grid cell around the world for maize, wheat, rice and soybeans. Emulators are useful for estimating conditions that have not already been simulated by GGCMI (e.g., in a seasonal prediction model) and also to diagnose model differences and capabilities. For example, emulators of the pDSSAT maize model tend to be more reliant on mean temperatures than the LPJmL model, and few models have strong responses to cold extremes. Second, we use a similar XGBoost approach to fit empirical models for national production data for the top 20 producing countries according to the United Nations Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO). Models utilize both climate observations and the GGCM models as predictors, resulting in skillful models for many (but not all) top producing-countries. The patterns of climate and crop model features selected indicate regions and systems that are better or worse simulated by the GGCMs. For example, information in cold extreme predictors is often combined with GGCM output predictors to provide sensitivity that models may underrepresent.
machine learning↗
ARM Data-Oriented Metrics and Diagnostics Package for Climate Model Evaluation
A Python-based metrics and diagnostics package is currently being developed by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Atmospheric Radiation Measurement (ARM) Infrastructure Team at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) to facilitate the use of long-term, high-frequency measurements from the ARM Facility in evaluating the regional climate simulation of clouds, radiation, and precipitation. This metrics and diagnostics package computes climatological means of targeted climate model simulation and generates tables and plots for comparing the model simulation with ARM observational data. The Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP) model data sets are also included in the package to enable model intercomparison as demonstrated in Zhang et al. (2017). The mean of the CMIP model can serve as a reference for individual models. Basic performance metrics are computed to measure the accuracy of mean state and variability of climate models. The evaluated physical quantities include cloud fraction, temperature, relative humidity, cloud liquid water path, total column water vapor, precipitation, sensible and latent heat fluxes, and radiative fluxes, with plan to extend to more fields, such as aerosol and microphysics properties. Process-oriented diagnostics focusing on individual cloud- and precipitation-related phenomena are also being developed for the evaluation and development of specific model physical parameterizations. The version 1.0 package is designed based on data collected at ARM’s Southern Great Plains (SGP) Research Facility, with the plan to extend to other ARM sites. The metrics and diagnostics package is currently built upon standard Python libraries and additional Python packages developed by DOE (such as CDMS and CDAT). The ARM metrics and diagnostic package is available publicly with the hope that it can serve as an easy entry point for climate modelers to compare their models with ARM data. In this report, we first present the input data, which constitutes the core content of the metrics and diagnostics package in section 2, and a user's guide documenting the workflow/structure of the version 1.0 codes, and including step-by-step instruction for running the package in section 3.
54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
Climate Change Penalty and Benefit on Surface Ozone: A Global Perspective Based on CMIP6 Earth System Models
This work presents an analysis of the effect of climate change on surface ozone discussing the related penalties and benefits around the globe from the global modelling perspective based on simulations with five CMIP6 (Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6) Earth System Models. As part of AerChemMIP (Aerosol Chemistry Model Intercomparison Project) all models conducted simulation experiments considering future climate (ssp370SST) and present-day climate (ssp370pdSST) under the same future emissions trajectory (SSP3-7.0). A multi-model global average climate change benefit on surface ozone of −0.96 ± 0.07 ppbv °C−1 is calculated which is mainly linked to the dominating role of enhanced ozone destruction with higher water vapour abundances under a warmer climate. Over regions remote from pollution sources, there is a robust decline in mean surface ozone concentration on an annual basis as well as for boreal winter and summer varying spatially from −0.2 to −2 ppbv °C−1, with strongest decline over tropical oceanic regions. The implication is that over regions remote from pollution sources (except over the Arctic) there is a consistent climate change benefit for baseline ozone due to global warming. However, ozone increases over regions close to anthropogenic pollution sources or close to enhanced natural biogenic volatile organic compounds emission sources with a rate ranging regionally from 0.2 to 2 ppbv C−1, implying a regional surface ozone penalty due to global warming. Overall, the future climate change enhances the efficiency of precursor emissions to generate surface ozone in polluted regions and thus the magnitude of this effect depends on the regional emission changes considered in this study within the SSP3_7.0 scenario. The comparison of the climate change impact effect on surface ozone versus the combined effect of climate and emission changes indicates the dominant role of precursor emission changes in projecting surface ozone concentrations under future climate change scenarios.
surface ozone↗
Constraints and Potentials of Future Irrigation Water Availability on Agricultural Production Under Climate Change
Freshwater availability is relevant to almost all socioeconomic and environmental impacts of climate and demographic change and their implications for sustainability. We compare ensembles of water supply and demand projections driven by ensemble output from five global climate models. Our results suggest reasons for concern. Direct climate impacts to maize, soybean, wheat, and rice involve losses of 400–2,600 Pcal (8–43% of present-day total). Freshwater limitations in some heavily irrigated regions could necessitate reversion of 20–60 Mha of cropland from irrigated to rainfed management, and a further loss of 600–2,900 Pcal. Freshwater abundance in other regions could help ameliorate these losses, but substantial investment in infrastructure would be required. We compare ensembles of water supply and demand projections from 10 global hydrological models and six global gridded crop models. These are produced as part of the Inter-Sectoral Impacts Model Intercomparison Project, with coordination from the Agricultural Model Intercomparison and Improvement Project, and driven by outputs of general circulation models run under representative concentration pathway 8.5 as part of the Fifth Coupled Model Intercomparison Project. Models project that direct climate impacts to maize, soybean, wheat, and rice involve losses of 400–1,400 Pcal (8–24% of present-day total) when CO2 fertilization effects are accounted for or 1,400–2,600 Pcal (24–43%) otherwise. Freshwater limitations in some irrigated regions (western United States; China; and West, South, and Central Asia) could necessitate the reversion of 20–60 Mha of cropland from irrigated to rainfed management by end-of-century, and a further loss of 600–2,900 Pcal of food production. In other regions (northern/eastern United States, parts of South America, much of Europe, and South East Asia) surplus water supply could in principle support a net increase in irrigation, although substantial investments in irrigation infrastructure would be required.
agriculture↗
Comparison of Clouds and Cloud Feedback between AMIP5 and AMIP6
We examine the changes in clouds and cloud feedback between Phase 5 (AMIP5) and Phase 6 (AMIP6) of the Atmospheric Model Intercomparison Project. Each model is perturbed by uniformly increasing the sea surface temperature by 4 K. The simulated cloud fraction, the perturbed states and cloud radiative kernels are used to derive cloud feedback in the shortwave (SW), longwave (LW) and their sum (Net). Compared to AMIP5, the cloud fraction in AMIP6 increases by 9.1%, while the perturbation leads to a 0.25% decrease. The Net cloud feedback at the top of the atmosphere (TOA) is almost double (174%). Statistical tests support that this change is mainly due to an increase in the surface SW cloud feedback caused by optically thick, middle and low clouds. The contribution of the atmospheric Net component (12%) stems from the increase in the atmospheric LW cloud feedback, likely to play a role in weakening (strengthening) the northward (southward) meridional atmospheric energy transport, while the opposite is true for the surface LW and Net cloud feedback in the meridional oceanic energy transport. The substantial increase in cloud feedback at the TOA primarily contributes to the higher climate sensitivity. The cloud feedback spread in AMIP6 is comparable to that in AMIP5.
Clouds↗
Climate Impacts on Global Agriculture Emerge Earlier in New Generation of Climate and Crop Models
Potential climate-related impacts on future crop yield are a major societal concern. Previous projections of the Agricultural Model Intercomparison and Improvement Project’s Global Gridded Crop Model Intercomparison based on the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 5 identified substantial climate impacts on all major crops, but associated uncertainties were substantial. Here we report new twenty-first-century projections using ensembles of latest-generation crop and climate models. Results suggest markedly more pessimistic yield responses for maize, soybean and rice compared to the original ensemble. Mean end-of-century maize productivity is shifted from +5% to −6% (SSP126) and from +1% to −24% (SSP585)—explained by warmer climate projections and improved crop model sensitivities. In contrast, wheat shows stronger gains (+9% shifted to +18%, SSP585), linked to higher CO 2 concentrations and expanded high-latitude gains. The ‘emergence’ of climate impacts consistently occurs earlier in the new projections—before 2040 for several main producing regions. While future yield estimates remain uncertain, these results suggest that major breadbasket regions will face distinct anthropogenic climatic risks sooner than previously anticipated.
crop model↗
Future Projection of Tropical Upper-Tropospheric Troughs and Implications for Tropical Cyclone Activity
Summertime tropical upper-tropospheric troughs (TUTTs) provide a unified framework to better understand how extratropical and tropical forcings jointly modulate basin-scale tropical cyclone (TC) activity. In this study, we examine future changes in TUTTs and their implications for TC activity. Multimodel ensemble-mean projections from 45 Coupled Model Intercomparison Project phase 6 (CMIP6) models suggest a contraction of the Pacific TUTT and an expansion of the Atlantic TUTT as the climate warms. Consistently, future changes in environment-based TC indices indicate that the large-scale conditions will become more favorable for TC genesis and intensification over the central North Pacific but less favorable over the tropical North Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico. Utilizing a TC-permitting large-ensemble dataset [i.e., the Database for Policy Decision-Making for Future Climate Change (d4PDF)] that adequately captures the observed interannual TUTT–TC relationships, we further confirm the impacts of projected TUTT changes on the TC activity in a warmer climate. In contrast, the TUTT–TC relationship is poorly represented in most CMIP6 High-Resolution Model Intercomparison Project (HighResMIP) models; such deficiencies call for caution when assessing future TC risk based on explicitly tracked TCs in these models. Additionally, CMIP6 projections show large intermodel spread in TUTT changes, implying uncertainty in projected TC activity, especially over the central-to-eastern Pacific and the North Atlantic. This intermodel spread is associated with interhemispheric sea surface temperature warming asymmetry, which leads to a meridional shift of the intertropical convergence zone (ITCZ) and the simultaneous weakening or strengthening of TUTTs in the North Pacific and North Atlantic. The potential contributions of anthropogenic aerosol forcing and oceanic circulation to this interhemispheric warming asymmetry are briefly examined.
Climate Change↗