Abstract. Numerical simulation, and in particular simulation of the earth system, relies on contributions from diverse communities, from those who develop models to those involved in devising, executing, and analysing numerical experiments.
Often these people work in different institutions and may be working with significant separation in time (particularly analysts, who may be working on data produced years earlier), and they typically communicate via published information (whether journal papers, technical notes, or websites).
The complexity of the models, experiments, and methodologies, along with the diversity (and sometimes inexact nature) of information sources, can easily lead to misinterpretation of what was actually intended or done.
In this paper we introduce a taxonomy of terms for more clearly defining numerical experiments, put it in the context of previous work on experimental ontologies, and describe how we have used it to document the experiments of the sixth phase for the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP6).
We describe how, through iteration with a range of CMIP6 stakeholders, we rationalized multiple sources of information and improved the clarity of experimental definitions.
We demonstrate how this process has added value to CMIP6 itself by (a) helping those devising experiments to be clear about their goals and their implementation, (b) making it easier for those executing experiments to know what is intended, (c) exposing interrelationships between experiments, and (d) making it clearer for third parties (data users) to understand the CMIP6 experiments.
We conclude with some lessons learnt and how these may be applied to future CMIP phases as well as other modelling campaigns.
Results from the carbon-land model intercomparison project (C-LAMP) and availability of the data on the earth system grid (ESG)