Search NASA⌕ Search

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.

At least 19 records
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2012

Evaluation of Arctic Sea Ice Thickness Simulated by Arctic Ocean Model Intercomparison Project Models

Six Arctic Ocean Model Intercomparison Project model simulations are compared with estimates of sea ice thickness derived from pan-Arctic satellite freeboard measurements (2004-2008); airborne electromagnetic measurements (2001-2009); ice draft data from moored instruments in Fram Strait, the Greenland Sea, and the Beaufort Sea (1992-2008) and from submarines (1975-2000); and drill hole data from the Arctic basin, Laptev, and East Siberian marginal seas (1982-1986) and coastal stations (1998-2009). Despite an assessment of six models that differ in numerical methods, resolution, domain, forcing, and boundary conditions, the models generally overestimate the thickness of measured ice thinner than approximately 2 mand underestimate the thickness of ice measured thicker than about approximately 2m. In the regions of flat immobile landfast ice (shallow Siberian Seas with depths less than 25-30 m), the models generally overestimate both the total observed sea ice thickness and rates of September and October ice growth from observations by more than 4 times and more than one standard deviation, respectively. The models do not reproduce conditions of fast ice formation and growth. Instead, the modeled fast ice is replaced with pack ice which drifts, generating ridges of increasing ice thickness, in addition to thermodynamic ice growth. Considering all observational data sets, the better correlations and smaller differences from observations are from the Estimating the Circulation and Climate of the Ocean, Phase II and Pan-Arctic Ice Ocean Modeling and Assimilation System models.

sea ice↗
NASA NTRS2021

Large-scale features of Last Interglacial climate: results from evaluating the lig127k simulations for the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP6)–Paleoclimate Modeling Intercomparison Project (PMIP4)

The modeling of paleoclimate, using physically based tools, is increasingly seen as a strong out-of-sample test of the models that are used for the projection of future climate changes. New to the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP6) is the Tier 1 Last Interglacial experiment for 127 000 years ago (lig127k), designed to address the climate responses to stronger orbital forcing than the midHolocene experiment, using the same state-of-the-art models as for the future and following a common experimental protocol. Here we present a first analysis of a multi-model ensemble of 17 climate models, all of which have completed the CMIP6 DECK (Diagnostic, Evaluation and Characterization of Klima) experiments. The equilibrium climate sensitivity (ECS) of these models varies from 1.8 to 5.6°C. The seasonal character of the insolation anomalies results in strong summer warming over the Northern Hemisphere continents in the lig127k ensemble as compared to the CMIP6 piControl and much-reduced minimum sea ice in the Arctic. The multi-model results indicate enhanced summer monsoonal precipitation in the Northern Hemisphere and reductions in the Southern Hemisphere. These responses are greater in the lig127k than the CMIP6 midHolocene simulations as expected from the larger insolation anomalies at 127 than 6 ka. New synthesis for surface temperature and precipitation, targeted for 127 ka, have been developed for comparison to the multi-model ensemble. The lig127k model ensemble and data reconstructions are in good agreement for summer temperature anomalies over Canada, Scandinavia, and the North Atlantic and for precipitation over the Northern Hemisphere continents. The model–data comparisons and mismatches point to further study of the sensitivity of the simulations to uncertainties in the boundary conditions and of the uncertainties and sparse coverage in current proxy reconstructions. The CMIP6–Paleoclimate Modeling Intercomparison Project (PMIP4) lig127k simulations, in combination with the proxy record, improve our confidence in future projections of monsoons, surface temperature, and Arctic sea ice, thus providing a key target for model evaluation and optimization.

Last Interglacial climate↗
DOE OSTI2024

Coupled model intercomparison project phase 6 (CMIP6) high resolution model intercomparison project (HighResMIP) bias in extreme rainfall drives underestimation of amazonian precipitation

Abstract Extreme rainfall events drive the amount and spatial distribution of rainfall in the Amazon and are a key driver of forest dynamics across the basin. This study investigates how the 3-hourly predictions in the High Resolution Model Intercomparison Project (HighResMIP, a component of the recent Coupled Model Intercomparison Project, CMIP6) represent extreme rainfall events at annual, seasonal, and sub-daily time scales. TRMM 3B42 (Tropical Rainfall Measuring Mission) 3 h data were used as observations. Our results showed that eleven out of seventeen HighResMIP models showed the observed association between rainfall and number of extreme events at the annual and seasonal scales. Two models captured the spatial pattern of number of extreme events at the seasonal and annual scales better (higher correlation) than the other models. None of the models captured the sub-daily timing of extreme rainfall, though some reproduced daily totals. Our results suggest that higher model resolution is a crucial factor for capturing extreme rainfall events in the Amazon, but it might not be the sole factor. Improving the representation of Amazon extreme rainfall events in HighResMIP models can help reduce model rainfall biases and uncertainties and enable more reliable assessments of the water cycle and forest dynamics in the Amazon.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2025

Towards an open model intercomparison platform for integrated assessment models scenarios

The majority of scenarios in the IPCC database are generated by integrated assessment models (IAMs) and come from model intercomparison projects. However, the way in which the current model intercomparison projects are organized is not open to all IAM teams worldwide. Here we propose a transparent and inclusive platform that is open to anyone with an IAM regarding protocols development, scenario submissions and results evaluation. We discuss the challenges of this approach, particularly human resources and financial support. Here, we identify diversity in the level of model capability and quality of model output as possibly critical issues. Despite such challenges, the IAM community and its scientific activities can improve and benefit from the proposed platform, ultimately contributing to better climate policymaking.

IAM↗
NASA NTRS2023

The Emissions Model Intercomparison Project (Emissions-MIP): Quantifying Model Sensitivity to Emission Characteristics

Anthropogenic emissions of aerosols and precursor compounds are known to significantly affect the energy balance of the Earth–atmosphere system, alter the formation of clouds and precipitation, and have a substantial impact on human health and the environment. Global models are an essential tool for examining the impacts of these emissions. In this study, we examine the sensitivity of model results to the assumed height of SO 2 injection, seasonality of SO 2 and black carbon (BC) particulate emissions, and the assumed fraction of SO 2 emissions that is injected into the atmosphere as particulate phase sulfate (SO 4 ) in 11 climate and chemistry models, including both chemical transport models and the atmospheric component of Earth system models. We find large variation in atmospheric lifetime across models for SO 2 , SO 4 , and BC, with a particularly large relative variation for SO 2 , which indicates that fundamental aspects of atmospheric sulfur chemistry remain uncertain. Of the perturbations examined in this study, the assumed height of SO 2 injection had the largest overall impacts, particularly on global mean net radiative flux (maximum difference of −0.35 W m −2 ), SO 2 lifetime over Northern Hemisphere land (maximum difference of 0.8 d), surface SO 2 concentration (up to 59 % decrease), and surface sulfate concentration (up to 23 % increase). Emitting SO 2 at height consistently increased SO 2 and SO 4 column burdens and shortwave cooling, with varying magnitudes, but had inconsistent effects across models on the sign of the change in implied cloud forcing. The assumed SO 4 emission fraction also had a significant impact on net radiative flux and surface sulfate concentration. Because these properties are not standardized across models this is a source of inter-model diversity typically neglected in model intercomparisons. These results imply a need to ensure that anthropogenic emission injection height and SO 4 emission fraction are accurately and consistently represented in global models.

Emissions Model Intercomparison Project↗
NASA NTRS2017

Biogeochemical Protocols and Diagnostics for the CMIP6 Ocean Model Intercomparison Project (OMIP)

The Ocean Model Intercomparison Project (OMIP) focuses on the physics and biogeochemistry of the ocean component of Earth system models participating in the sixth phase of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP6). OMIP aims to provide standard protocols and diagnostics for ocean models, while offering a forum to promote their common assessment and improvement. It also offers to compare solutions of the same ocean models when forced with reanalysis data (OMIP simulations) vs. when integrated within fully coupled Earth system models (CMIP6). Here we detail simulation protocols and diagnostics for OMIP's biogeochemical and inert chemical tracers. These passive-tracer simulations will be coupled to ocean circulation models, initialized with observational data or output from a model spin-up, and forced by repeating the 1948-2009 surface fluxes of heat, fresh water, and momentum. These so-called OMIP-BGC simulations include three inert chemical tracers (CFC-11, CFC-12, SF [subscript] 6) and biogeochemical tracers (e.g., dissolved inorganic carbon, carbon isotopes, alkalinity, nutrients, and oxygen). Modelers will use their preferred prognostic BGC model but should follow common guidelines for gas exchange and carbonate chemistry. Simulations include both natural and total carbon tracers. The required forced simulation (omip1) will be initialized with gridded observational climatologies. An optional forced simulation (omip1-spunup) will be initialized instead with BGC fields from a long model spin-up, preferably for 2000 years or more, and forced by repeating the same 62-year meteorological forcing. That optional run will also include abiotic tracers of total dissolved inorganic carbon and radiocarbon, CTabio and 14CTabio, to assess deep-ocean ventilation and distinguish the role of physics vs. biology. These simulations will be forced by observed atmospheric histories of the three inert gases and CO2 as well as carbon isotope ratios of CO2. OMIP-BGC simulation protocols are founded on those from previous phases of the Ocean Carbon-Cycle Model Intercomparison Project. They have been merged and updated to reflect improvements concerning gas exchange, carbonate chemistry, and new data for initial conditions and atmospheric gas histories. Code is provided to facilitate their implementation.

Carbon↗
DOE OSTI2025

Towards provision of regularly updated climate data from the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project

The Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP) is a flagship of the World Climate Research Programme (WCRP). CMIP has become a recognised ‘brand’ in climate circles evolving over the last thirty years from a targeted research activity by a small number of climate modelling centres intercomparing their Earth System Model (ESM) simulations to a broad international coordinated research effort (Durack et al, 2025). CMIP is organized as a research activity leveraging funded and in-kind contributions from experts within modelling centres and the broader scientific community supported more recently by a fully-funded International Project Office. Within CMIP, Model Intercomparison Projects (MIPs) are community-designed to understand past, present and future climate. CMIP data provides a valuable resource for climate research and is routinely used to assess model representation of climate processes and test scientific hypotheses in the context of model uncertainty and (forced and internal) variability as evident from its prolific use in scientific publications1 . The impact relies on enabling infrastructure (most prominently via the Earth System Grid Federation (ESGF)), which allows sharing of simulation output, provision of the boundary conditions used in each simulation, and definition of the data standards that are essential to facilitating wide use of the data. The impact is supplemented by the wide-ranging scrutiny to which model simulations are subjected. Beyond its use in research, CMIP data is a key resource for communities producing derived climate information from downscaling and impact studies, such as the Coordinated Regional Downscaling Experiment (CORDEX; Gutowski et al., 2016) and the Intersectoral Impacts MIP (ISIMIP; Frieler et al., 2024). Government, academic and commercial entities also increasingly rely on CMIP and its downstream data for climate risk assessments and climate services (for example, Copernicus Climate Change Service and World Bank portal). This means that, although CMIP is a research activity, it increasingly serves a secondary and very relevant role as a provider of climate data – a long-recognised dichotomy (Stevens, 2024). Research and applications have distinct needs, with the former requiring flexibility and generality and the latter consistency. Here we explain how the design of the research activity has been adapted to reduce the burdens imposed by applications and how the research infrastructure might evolve to further enable scientific inquiry. We propose one possible approach to consistently providing model information and projections for applications in the future.

Environmental sciences↗
DOE OSTI2025

Corrigendum to “The Emissions Model Intercomparison Project (Emissions-MIP): quantifying model sensitivity to emission characteristics” published in Atmos. Chem. Phys., 23, 14779–14799, 2023

Anthropogenic emissions of aerosols and precursor compounds are known to significantly affect the energy balance of the Earth–atmosphere system, alter the formation of clouds and precipitation, and have a substantial impact on human health and the environment. Global models are an essential tool for examining the impacts of these emissions. In this study, we examine the sensitivity of model results to the assumed height of SO 2 injection, seasonality of SO 2 and black carbon (BC) particulate emissions, and the assumed fraction of SO 2 emissions that is injected into the atmosphere as particulate phase sulfate (SO 4 ) in 11 climate and chemistry models, including both chemical transport models and the atmospheric component of Earth system models. We find large variation in atmospheric lifetime across models for SO 2 , SO 4 , and BC, with a particularly large relative variation for SO 2 , which indicates that fundamental aspects of atmospheric sulfur chemistry remain uncertain. Of the perturbations examined in this study, the assumed height of SO 2 injection had the largest overall impacts, particularly on global mean net radiative flux (maximum difference of -0.35?W?m-2), SO2 lifetime over Northern Hemisphere land (maximum difference of 0.8?d), surface SO 2 concentration (up to 59?% decrease), and surface sulfate concentration (up to 23?% increase). Emitting SO 2 at height consistently increased SO 2 and SO 4 column burdens and shortwave cooling, with varying magnitudes, but had inconsistent effects across models on the sign of the change in implied cloud forcing. The assumed SO 4 emission fraction also had a significant impact on net radiative flux and surface sulfate concentration. Because these properties are not standardized across models this is a source of inter-model diversity typically neglected in model intercomparisons. These results imply a need to ensure that anthropogenic emission injection height and SO 4 emission fraction are accurately and consistently represented in global models.

Ahsan, Hamza [Pacific Northwest National Laborator↗
NASA NTRS2015

ISMIP6: Ice Sheet Model Intercomparison Project for CMIP6

ISMIP6 (Ice Sheet Model Intercomparison Project for CMIP6) targets the Cryosphere in a Changing Climate and the Future Sea Level Grand Challenges of the WCRP (World Climate Research Program). Primary goal is to provide future sea level contribution from the Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets, along with associated uncertainty. Secondary goal is to investigate feedback due to dynamic ice sheet models. Experiment design uses and augment the existing CMIP6 (Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6) DECK (Diagnosis, Evaluation, and Characterization of Klima) experiments. Additonal MIP (Model Intercomparison Project)- specific experiments will be designed for ISM (Ice Sheet Model). Effort builds on the Ice2sea, SeaRISE (Sea-level Response to Ice Sheet Evolution) and COMBINE (Comprehensive Modelling of the Earth System for Better Climate Prediction and Projection) efforts.

CMIP6↗
NASA NTRS2021

Climate model projections from the Scenario Model Intercomparison Project (ScenarioMIP) of CMIP6

The Scenario Model Intercomparison Project (ScenarioMIP) defines and coordinates the main set of future climate projections, based on concentration-driven simulations, within the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project phase 6 (CMIP6). This paper presents a range of its outcomes by synthesizing results from the participating global coupled Earth system models. We limit our scope to the analysis of strictly geophysical outcomes: mainly global averages and spatial patterns of change for surface air temperature and precipitation. We also compare CMIP6 projections to CMIP5 results, especially for those scenarios that were designed to provide continuity across the CMIP phases, at the same time highlighting important differences in forcing composition, as well as in results. The range of future temperature and precipitation changes by the end of the century (2081–2100) encompassing the Tier 1 experiments based on the Shared Socioeconomic Pathway (SSP) scenarios (SSP1-2.6, SSP2-4.5, SSP3-7.0 and SSP5-8.5) and SSP1-1.9 spans a larger range of outcomes compared to CMIP5, due to higher warming (by close to 1.5 °C) reached at the upper end of the 5 %–95 % envelope of the highest scenario (SSP5-8.5). This is due to both the wider range of radiative forcing that the new scenarios cover and the higher climate sensitivities in some of the new models compared to their CMIP5 predecessors. Spatial patterns of change for temperature and precipitation averaged over models and scenarios have familiar features, and an analysis of their variations confirms model structural differences to be the dominant source of uncertainty. Models also differ with respect to the size and evolution of internal variability as measured by individual models' initial condition ensemble spreads, according to a set of initial condition ensemble simulations available under SSP3-7.0. These experiments suggest a tendency for internal variability to decrease along the course of the century in this scenario, a result that will benefit from further analysis over a larger set of models. Benefits of mitigation, all else being equal in terms of societal drivers, appear clearly when comparing scenarios developed under the same SSP but to which different degrees of mitigation have been applied. It is also found that a mild overshoot in temperature of a few decades around mid-century, as represented in SSP5-3.4OS, does not affect the end outcome of temperature and precipitation changes by 2100, which return to the same levels as those reached by the gradually increasing SSP4-3.4 (not erasing the possibility, however, that other aspects of the system may not be as easily reversible). Central estimates of the time at which the ensemble means of the different scenarios reach a given warming level might be biased by the inclusion of models that have shown faster warming in the historical period than the observed. Those estimates show all scenarios reaching 1.5 °C of warming compared to the 1850–1900 baseline in the second half of the current decade, with the time span between slow and fast warming covering between 20 and 27 years from present. The warming level of 2 °C of warming is reached as early as 2039 by the ensemble mean under SSP5-8.5 but as late as the mid-2060s under SSP1-2.6. The highest warming level considered (5 °C) is reached by the ensemble mean only under SSP5-8.5 and not until the mid-2090s.d-2090s.

Scenario Model Intercomparison Project (ScenarioMI↗
NASA NTRS2013

The Atmospheric Chemistry and Climate Model Intercomparison Project (ACCMIP): Overview and Description of Models, Simulations and Climate Diagnostics

The Atmospheric Chemistry and Climate Model Intercomparison Project (ACCMIP) consists of a series of time slice experiments targeting the long-term changes in atmospheric composition between 1850 and 2100, with the goal of documenting composition changes and the associated radiative forcing. In this overview paper, we introduce the ACCMIP activity, the various simulations performed (with a requested set of 14) and the associated model output. The 16 ACCMIP models have a wide range of horizontal and vertical resolutions, vertical extent, chemistry schemes and interaction with radiation and clouds. While anthropogenic and biomass burning emissions were specified for all time slices in the ACCMIP protocol, it is found that the natural emissions are responsible for a significant range across models, mostly in the case of ozone precursors. The analysis of selected present-day climate diagnostics (precipitation, temperature, specific humidity and zonal wind) reveals biases consistent with state-of-the-art climate models. The model-to- model comparison of changes in temperature, specific humidity and zonal wind between 1850 and 2000 and between 2000 and 2100 indicates mostly consistent results. However, models that are clear outliers are different enough from the other models to significantly affect their simulation of atmospheric chemistry.

humidity↗
NASA NTRS2015

Pliocene Model Intercomparison (PlioMIP) Phase 2: Scientific Objectives and Experimental Design

The Pliocene Model Intercomparison Project (PlioMIP) is a co-ordinated international climate modelling initiative to study and understand climate and environments of the Late Pliocene, and their potential relevance in the context of future climate change. PlioMIP operates under the umbrella of the Palaeoclimate Modelling Intercomparison Project (PMIP), which examines multiple intervals in Earth history, the consistency of model predictions in simulating these intervals and their ability to reproduce climate signals preserved in geological climate archives. This paper provides a thorough model intercomparison project description, and documents the experimental design in a detailed way. Specifically, this paper describes the experimental design and boundary conditions that will be utilized for the experiments in Phase 2 of PlioMIP.

climate change↗
NASA NTRS2011

Pliocene Model Intercomparison Project (PlioMIP): Experimental Design and Boundary Conditions (Experiment 2)

The Palaeoclimate Modelling Intercomparison Project has expanded to include a model intercomparison for the mid-Pliocene warm period (3.29 to 2.97 million yr ago). This project is referred to as PlioMIP (the Pliocene Model Intercomparison Project). Two experiments have been agreed upon and together compose the initial phase of PlioMIP. The first (Experiment 1) is being performed with atmosphere only climate models. The second (Experiment 2) utilizes fully coupled ocean-atmosphere climate models. Following on from the publication of the experimental design and boundary conditions for Experiment 1 in Geoscientific Model Development, this paper provides the necessary description of differences and/or additions to the experimental design for Experiment 2.

Haywood, A. M.↗
DOE OSTI2025

A Model Intercomparison Study of Aerosol‐Cloud‐Turbulence Interactions in a Cloud Chamber: 1. Model Results

This study presents the first model intercomparison of aerosol‐cloud‐turbulence interactions in a controlled cloudy Rayleigh‐Bénard Convection chamber environment, utilizing the Pi Chamber at Michigan Technological University. We analyzed simulated cloud chamber‐averaged statistics of microphysics and thermodynamics in a warm‐phase, cloudy environment under steady‐state conditions at varying aerosol injection rates. Simulation results from seven distinct models (DNS, LES, and a 1D turbulence model) were compared. Our findings demonstrate that while all models qualitatively capture observed trends in droplet number concentration, mean radius, and droplet size distributions at both high and low aerosol injection rates, significant quantitative differences were observed. Notably, droplet number concentrations varied by over two orders of magnitude between models for the same injection rates, indicating sensitivities to the model treatments in droplet activation and removal and wall fluxes. Furthermore, inconsistencies in vertical relative humidity profiles and in achieving steady‐state liquid water content suggest the need for further investigation into the mechanisms driving these variations. Despite these discrepancies, the models generally reproduced consistent power‐law relationships between the microphysical variables. This model intercomparison underscores the importance of controlled cloud chamber experiments for validating and improving cloud microphysical parameterizations. Recommendations for future modeling studies are also highlighted, including constraining wall conditions and processes, investigating droplet/aerosol removal (including sidewall losses), and conducting simplified experiments to isolate specific processes contributing to model divergence and reduce model uncertainties.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
NASA NTRS2014

Assessing Agricultural Risks of Climate Change in the 21st Century in a Global Gridded Crop Model Intercomparison

Here we present the results from an intercomparison of multiple global gridded crop models (GGCMs) within the framework of the Agricultural Model Intercomparison and Improvement Project and the Inter-Sectoral Impacts Model Intercomparison Project. Results indicate strong negative effects of climate change, especially at higher levels of warming and at low latitudes; models that include explicit nitrogen stress project more severe impacts. Across seven GGCMs, five global climate models, and four representative concentration pathways, model agreement on direction of yield changes is found in many major agricultural regions at both low and high latitudes; however, reducing uncertainty in sign of response in mid-latitude regions remains a challenge. Uncertainties related to the representation of carbon dioxide, nitrogen, and high temperature effects demonstrated here show that further research is urgently needed to better understand effects of climate change on agricultural production and to devise targeted adaptation strategies.

agriculture↗
NASA NTRS2012

The Agricultural Model Intercomparison and Improvement Project (AgMIP): Protocols and Pilot Studies

The Agricultural Model Intercomparison and Improvement Project (AgMIP) is a major international effort linking the climate, crop, and economic modeling communities with cutting-edge information technology to produce improved crop and economic models and the next generation of climate impact projections for the agricultural sector. The goals of AgMIP are to improve substantially the characterization of world food security due to climate change and to enhance adaptation capacity in both developing and developed countries. Analyses of the agricultural impacts of climate variability and change require a transdisciplinary effort to consistently link state-of-the-art climate scenarios to crop and economic models. Crop model outputs are aggregated as inputs to regional and global economic models to determine regional vulnerabilities, changes in comparative advantage, price effects, and potential adaptation strategies in the agricultural sector. Climate, Crop Modeling, Economics, and Information Technology Team Protocols are presented to guide coordinated climate, crop modeling, economics, and information technology research activities around the world, along with AgMIP Cross-Cutting Themes that address uncertainty, aggregation and scaling, and the development of Representative Agricultural Pathways (RAPs) to enable testing of climate change adaptations in the context of other regional and global trends. The organization of research activities by geographic region and specific crops is described, along with project milestones. Pilot results demonstrate AgMIP's role in assessing climate impacts with explicit representation of uncertainties in climate scenarios and simulations using crop and economic models. An intercomparison of wheat model simulations near Obregón, Mexico reveals inter-model differences in yield sensitivity to [CO2] with model uncertainty holding approximately steady as concentrations rise, while uncertainty related to choice of crop model increases with rising temperatures. Wheat model simulations with midcentury climate scenarios project a slight decline in absolute yields that is more sensitive to selection of crop model than to global climate model, emissions scenario, or climate scenario downscaling method. A comparison of regional and national-scale economic simulations finds a large sensitivity of projected yield changes to the simulations' resolved scales. Finally, a global economic model intercomparison example demonstrates that improvements in the understanding of agriculture futures arise from integration of the range of uncertainty in crop, climate, and economic modeling results in multi-model assessments.

Rosenzweig, C.↗
NASA NTRS2022

Scientific Data From Precipitation Driver Response Model Intercomparison Project

This data descriptor reports the main scientific values from General Circulation Models (GCMs) in the Precipitation Driver and Response Model Intercomparison Project (PDRMIP). The purpose of the GCM simulations has been to enhance the scientific understanding of how changes in greenhouse gases, aerosols, and incoming solar radiation perturb the Earth’s radiation balance and its climate response in terms of changes in temperature and precipitation. Here we provide global and annual mean results for a large set of coupled atmospheric-ocean GCM simulations and a description of how to easily extract files from the dataset. The simulations consist of single idealized perturbations to the climate system and have been shown to achieve important insight in complex climate simulations. We therefore expect this data set to be valuable and highly used to understand simulations from complex GCMs and Earth System Models for various phases of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project

Precipitation Driver Response Model Intercompariso↗
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↗