Articles | Volume 12, issue 7
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-3099-2019
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-3099-2019
Model evaluation paper
 | 
19 Jul 2019
Model evaluation paper |  | 19 Jul 2019

Progress towards a probabilistic Earth system model: examining the impact of stochasticity in the atmosphere and land component of EC-Earth v3.2

Kristian Strommen, Hannah M. Christensen, Dave MacLeod, Stephan Juricke, and Tim N. Palmer

Related authors

Predictable decadal forcing of the North Atlantic jet speed by sub-polar North Atlantic sea surface temperatures
Kristian Strommen, Tim Woollings, Paolo Davini, Paolo Ruggieri, and Isla R. Simpson
Weather Clim. Dynam., 4, 853–874, https://doi.org/10.5194/wcd-4-853-2023,https://doi.org/10.5194/wcd-4-853-2023, 2023
Short summary
Improved teleconnection between Arctic sea ice and the North Atlantic Oscillation through stochastic process representation
Kristian Strommen, Stephan Juricke, and Fenwick Cooper
Weather Clim. Dynam., 3, 951–975, https://doi.org/10.5194/wcd-3-951-2022,https://doi.org/10.5194/wcd-3-951-2022, 2022
Short summary
Quantifying climate model representation of the wintertime Euro-Atlantic circulation using geopotential-jet regimes
Joshua Dorrington, Kristian Strommen, and Federico Fabiano
Weather Clim. Dynam., 3, 505–533, https://doi.org/10.5194/wcd-3-505-2022,https://doi.org/10.5194/wcd-3-505-2022, 2022
Short summary

Related subject area

Climate and Earth system modeling
An overview of cloud–radiation denial experiments for the Energy Exascale Earth System Model version 1
Bryce E. Harrop, Jian Lu, L. Ruby Leung, William K. M. Lau, Kyu-Myong Kim, Brian Medeiros, Brian J. Soden, Gabriel A. Vecchi, Bosong Zhang, and Balwinder Singh
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 3111–3135, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-3111-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-3111-2024, 2024
Short summary
The computational and energy cost of simulation and storage for climate science: lessons from CMIP6
Mario C. Acosta, Sergi Palomas, Stella V. Paronuzzi Ticco, Gladys Utrera, Joachim Biercamp, Pierre-Antoine Bretonniere, Reinhard Budich, Miguel Castrillo, Arnaud Caubel, Francisco Doblas-Reyes, Italo Epicoco, Uwe Fladrich, Sylvie Joussaume, Alok Kumar Gupta, Bryan Lawrence, Philippe Le Sager, Grenville Lister, Marie-Pierre Moine, Jean-Christophe Rioual, Sophie Valcke, Niki Zadeh, and Venkatramani Balaji
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 3081–3098, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-3081-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-3081-2024, 2024
Short summary
Subgrid-scale variability of cloud ice in the ICON-AES 1.3.00
Sabine Doktorowski, Jan Kretzschmar, Johannes Quaas, Marc Salzmann, and Odran Sourdeval
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 3099–3110, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-3099-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-3099-2024, 2024
Short summary
INFERNO-peat v1.0.0: a representation of northern high-latitude peat fires in the JULES-INFERNO global fire model
Katie R. Blackford, Matthew Kasoar, Chantelle Burton, Eleanor Burke, Iain Colin Prentice, and Apostolos Voulgarakis
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 3063–3079, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-3063-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-3063-2024, 2024
Short summary
The 4DEnVar-based weakly coupled land data assimilation system for E3SM version 2
Pengfei Shi, L. Ruby Leung, Bin Wang, Kai Zhang, Samson M. Hagos, and Shixuan Zhang
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 3025–3040, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-3025-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-3025-2024, 2024
Short summary

Cited articles

Arakawa, A. and Schubert, W. H.: Interaction of a cumulus cloud ensemble with the large scale environment, Part I, J. Atmos. Sci., 31, 674–701, https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0469(1974)031<0674:IOACCE>2.0.CO;2, 1974. a
Baldwin, M. P., Gray, L. J., Dunkerton, T. J., Hamilton, K., Haynes, P. H., Randel, W. J., Holton, J. R., Alexander, M. J., Hirota, I., Horinouchi, T., Jones, D. B., Kinnersley, J. S., Marquardt, C., Sato, K., and Takahashi, M.: The quasi-biennial oscillation, Rev. Geophys., 39, 179–229, https://doi.org/10.1029/1999RG000073, 2001. a
Balsamo, G., Beljaars, A., Scipal, K., Viterbo, P., van den Hurk, B., Hirschi, M., and Betts, A. K.: A Revised Hydrology for the ECMWF Model: Verification from Field Site to Terrestrial Water Storage and Impact in the Integrated Forecast System, J. Hydrometeorol., 10, 623–643, https://doi.org/10.1175/2008JHM1068.1, 2009. a, b
Bauer, P., Thorpe, A., and Brunet, G.: The quiet revolution of numerical weather prediction, Nature, 525, 47–55, https://doi.org/10.1038/nature14956, 2015. a
Beljaars, A. E. A.: The numerics of physical parametrization, in: Seminar on recent developments in numerical methods for atmospheric and ocean modelling, ECMW, 113–134, 2004. a
Download
Short summary
Due to computational limitations, climate models cannot fully resolve the laws of physics below a certain scale – a large source of errors and uncertainty. Stochastic schemes aim to account for this by randomly sampling the possible unresolved states. We develop new stochastic schemes for the EC-Earth climate model and evaluate their impact on model performance. While several benefits are found, the impact is sometimes too strong, suggesting such schemes must be carefully calibrated before use.