scholarly journals On the Effective Number of Climate Models

2011 ◽  
Vol 24 (9) ◽  
pp. 2358-2367 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christopher Pennell ◽  
Thomas Reichler
Keyword(s):  
Climate Models ◽  
Future Climate Change ◽  
Effective Number ◽  
Coupled Models ◽  
Underlying Assumption ◽  
New Information ◽  
Independent Information ◽  
Model Predictions ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Multimodel Ensembles

Abstract Projections of future climate change are increasingly based on the output of many different models. Typically, the mean over all model simulations is considered as the optimal prediction, with the underlying assumption that different models provide statistically independent information evenly distributed around the true state. However, there is reason to believe that this is not the best assumption. Coupled models are of comparable complexity and are constructed in similar ways. Some models share parts of the same code and some models are even developed at the same center. Therefore, the limitations of these models tend to be fairly similar, contributing to the well-known problem of common model biases and possibly to an unrealistically small spread in the outcomes of model predictions. This study attempts to quantify the extent of this problem by asking how many models there effectively are and how to best determine this number. Quantifying the effective number of models is achieved by evaluating 24 state-of-the-art models and their ability to simulate broad aspects of twentieth-century climate. Using two different approaches, the amount of unique information in the ensemble is calculated and the effective ensemble size is found to be much smaller than the actual number of models. As more models are included in an ensemble, the amount of new information diminishes in proportion. Furthermore, this reduction is found to go beyond the problem of “same center” models and systemic similarities are seen to exist across all models. The results suggest that current methodologies for the interpretation of multimodel ensembles may lead to overly confident climate predictions.

scholarly journals Reduced global warming from CMIP6 projections when weighting models by performance and independence

2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (4) ◽  
pp. 995-1012
Author(s):  
Lukas Brunner ◽  
Angeline G. Pendergrass ◽  
Flavio Lehner ◽  
Anna L. Merrifield ◽  
Ruth Lorenz ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Retrospective Analysis ◽  
Climate Models ◽  
Cmip5 Models ◽  
Future Climate Change ◽  
Historical Period ◽  
Climate Change Scenarios ◽  
Uncertainty Range ◽  
Future Warming ◽  
The Mean

Abstract. The sixth Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP6) constitutes the latest update on expected future climate change based on a new generation of climate models. To extract reliable estimates of future warming and related uncertainties from these models, the spread in their projections is often translated into probabilistic estimates such as the mean and likely range. Here, we use a model weighting approach, which accounts for the models' historical performance based on several diagnostics as well as model interdependence within the CMIP6 ensemble, to calculate constrained distributions of global mean temperature change. We investigate the skill of our approach in a perfect model test, where we use previous-generation CMIP5 models as pseudo-observations in the historical period. The performance of the distribution weighted in the abovementioned manner with respect to matching the pseudo-observations in the future is then evaluated, and we find a mean increase in skill of about 17 % compared with the unweighted distribution. In addition, we show that our independence metric correctly clusters models known to be similar based on a CMIP6 “family tree”, which enables the application of a weighting based on the degree of inter-model dependence. We then apply the weighting approach, based on two observational estimates (the fifth generation of the European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts Retrospective Analysis – ERA5, and the Modern-Era Retrospective analysis for Research and Applications, version 2 – MERRA-2), to constrain CMIP6 projections under weak (SSP1-2.6) and strong (SSP5-8.5) climate change scenarios (SSP refers to the Shared Socioeconomic Pathways). Our results show a reduction in the projected mean warming for both scenarios because some CMIP6 models with high future warming receive systematically lower performance weights. The mean of end-of-century warming (2081–2100 relative to 1995–2014) for SSP5-8.5 with weighting is 3.7 ∘C, compared with 4.1 ∘C without weighting; the likely (66%) uncertainty range is 3.1 to 4.6 ∘C, which equates to a 13 % decrease in spread. For SSP1-2.6, the weighted end-of-century warming is 1 ∘C (0.7 to 1.4 ∘C), which results in a reduction of −0.1 ∘C in the mean and −24 % in the likely range compared with the unweighted case.

scholarly journals Atmospheric Dynamics Feedback: Concept, Simulations, and Climate Implications

2018 ◽  
Vol 31 (8) ◽  
pp. 3249-3264 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael P. Byrne ◽  
Tapio Schneider
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Atmospheric Circulation ◽  
Radiative Forcing ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
Climate Models ◽  
Atmospheric Dynamics ◽  
Future Climate Change ◽  
Coupled Models ◽  
Near Surface ◽  
Circulation Changes

AbstractThe regional climate response to radiative forcing is largely controlled by changes in the atmospheric circulation. It has been suggested that global climate sensitivity also depends on the circulation response, an effect called the “atmospheric dynamics feedback.” Using a technique to isolate the influence of changes in atmospheric circulation on top-of-the-atmosphere radiation, the authors calculate the atmospheric dynamics feedback in coupled climate models. Large-scale circulation changes contribute substantially to all-sky and cloud feedbacks in the tropics but are relatively less important at higher latitudes. Globally averaged, the atmospheric dynamics feedback is positive and amplifies the near-surface temperature response to climate change by an average of 8% in simulations with coupled models. A constraint related to the atmospheric mass budget results in the dynamics feedback being small on large scales relative to feedbacks associated with thermodynamic processes. Idealized-forcing simulations suggest that circulation changes at high latitudes are potentially more effective at influencing global temperature than circulation changes at low latitudes, and the implications for past and future climate change are discussed.

Should we believe model predictions of future climate change?

2008 ◽  
Vol 366 (1885) ◽  
pp. 4647-4664 ◽  
Author(s):  
Reto Knutti
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Climate Models ◽  
Computer Models ◽  
Future Climate ◽  
Future Climate Change ◽  
Climate Modelling ◽  
Policy Makers ◽  
The Public ◽  
Numerical Computer ◽  
Model Predictions

Predictions of future climate are based on elaborate numerical computer models. As computational capacity increases and better observations become available, one would expect the model predictions to become more reliable. However, are they really improving, and how do we know? This paper discusses how current climate models are evaluated, why and where scientists have confidence in their models, how uncertainty in predictions can be quantified, and why models often tend to converge on what we observe but not on what we predict. Furthermore, it outlines some strategies on how the climate modelling community may overcome some of the current deficiencies in the attempt to provide useful information to the public and policy-makers.

scholarly journals Historically-based run-time bias corrections substantially improve model projections of 100 years of future climate change

2020 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Gerhard Krinner ◽  
Viatcheslav Kharin ◽  
Romain Roehrig ◽  
John Scinocca ◽  
Francis Codron
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Climate Models ◽  
Coupled Model ◽  
Atmospheric Model ◽  
Climate Impact ◽  
Future Climate ◽  
Future Climate Change ◽  
Historical Period ◽  
Underlying Assumption ◽  
Bias Corrections

Abstract Climate models and/or their output are usually bias-corrected for climate impact studies. The underlying assumption of these corrections is that climate biases are essentially stationary between historical and future climate states. Under very strong climate change, the validity of this assumption is uncertain, so the practical benefit of bias corrections remains an open question. Here, this issue is addressed in the context of bias correcting the climate models themselves. Employing the ARPEGE, LMDZ and CanAM4 atmospheric models, we undertook experiments in which one centre’s atmospheric model takes another centre’s coupled model as observations during the historical period, to define the bias correction, and as the reference under future projections of strong climate change, to evaluate its impact. This allows testing of the stationarity assumption directly from the historical through future periods for three different models. These experiments provide evidence for the validity of the new bias-corrected model approach. In particular, temperature, wind and pressure biases are reduced by 40–60% and, with few exceptions, more than 50% of the improvement obtained over the historical period is on average preserved after 100 years of strong climate change. Below 3 °C global average surface temperature increase, these corrections globally retain 80% of their benefit.

scholarly journals Challenges in Combining Projections from Multiple Climate Models

2010 ◽  
Vol 23 (10) ◽  
pp. 2739-2758 ◽  
Author(s):  
Reto Knutti ◽  
Reinhard Furrer ◽  
Claudia Tebaldi ◽  
Jan Cermak ◽  
Gerald A. Meehl
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
General Circulation ◽  
Quantitative Methods ◽  
Climate Models ◽  
Initial Conditions ◽  
Future Climate ◽  
Future Climate Change ◽  
Individual Model ◽  
Model Average ◽  
Multimodel Ensembles

Abstract Recent coordinated efforts, in which numerous general circulation climate models have been run for a common set of experiments, have produced large datasets of projections of future climate for various scenarios. Those multimodel ensembles sample initial conditions, parameters, and structural uncertainties in the model design, and they have prompted a variety of approaches to quantifying uncertainty in future climate change. International climate change assessments also rely heavily on these models. These assessments often provide equal-weighted averages as best-guess results, assuming that individual model biases will at least partly cancel and that a model average prediction is more likely to be correct than a prediction from a single model based on the result that a multimodel average of present-day climate generally outperforms any individual model. This study outlines the motivation for using multimodel ensembles and discusses various challenges in interpreting them. Among these challenges are that the number of models in these ensembles is usually small, their distribution in the model or parameter space is unclear, and that extreme behavior is often not sampled. Model skill in simulating present-day climate conditions is shown to relate only weakly to the magnitude of predicted change. It is thus unclear by how much the confidence in future projections should increase based on improvements in simulating present-day conditions, a reduction of intermodel spread, or a larger number of models. Averaging model output may further lead to a loss of signal—for example, for precipitation change where the predicted changes are spatially heterogeneous, such that the true expected change is very likely to be larger than suggested by a model average. Last, there is little agreement on metrics to separate “good” and “bad” models, and there is concern that model development, evaluation, and posterior weighting or ranking are all using the same datasets. While the multimodel average appears to still be useful in some situations, these results show that more quantitative methods to evaluate model performance are critical to maximize the value of climate change projections from global models.

Tropical Water Vapor and Cloud Feedbacks in Climate Models: A Further Assessment Using Coupled Simulations

2009 ◽  
Vol 22 (5) ◽  
pp. 1287-1304 ◽  
Author(s):  
De-Zheng Sun ◽  
Yongqiang Yu ◽  
Tao Zhang
Keyword(s):  
Global Warming ◽  
Water Vapor ◽  
Negative Feedback ◽  
Positive Feedback ◽  
Climate Models ◽  
Coupled Models ◽  
Albedo Feedback ◽  
Enso Variability ◽  
Cloud Albedo ◽  
The Mean

Abstract By comparing the response of clouds and water vapor to ENSO forcing in nature with that in Atmospheric Model Intercomparison Project (AMIP) simulations by some leading climate models, an earlier evaluation of tropical cloud and water vapor feedbacks has revealed the following two common biases in the models: 1) an underestimate of the strength of the negative cloud albedo feedback and 2) an overestimate of the positive feedback from the greenhouse effect of water vapor. Extending the same analysis to the fully coupled simulations of these models as well as other Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) coupled models, it is found that these two biases persist. Relative to the earlier estimates from AMIP simulations, the overestimate of the positive feedback from water vapor is alleviated somewhat for most of the coupled simulations. Improvements in the simulation of the cloud albedo feedback are only found in the models whose AMIP runs suggest either a positive or nearly positive cloud albedo feedback. The strength of the negative cloud albedo feedback in all other models is found to be substantially weaker than that estimated from the corresponding AMIP simulations. Consequently, although additional models are found to have a cloud albedo feedback in their AMIP simulations that is as strong as in the observations, all coupled simulations analyzed in this study have a weaker negative feedback from the cloud albedo and therefore a weaker negative feedback from the net surface heating than that indicated in observations. The weakening in the cloud albedo feedback is apparently linked to a reduced response of deep convection over the equatorial Pacific, which is in turn linked to the excessive cold tongue in the mean climate of these models. The results highlight that the feedbacks of water vapor and clouds—the cloud albedo feedback in particular—may depend on the mean intensity of the hydrological cycle. Whether the intermodel variations in the feedback from cloud albedo (water vapor) in the ENSO variability are correlated with the intermodel variations of the feedback from cloud albedo (water vapor) in global warming has also been examined. While a weak positive correlation between the intermodel variations in the feedback of water vapor during ENSO and the intermodel variations in the water vapor feedback during global warming was found, there is no significant correlation found between the intermodel variations in the cloud albedo feedback during ENSO and the intermodel variations in the cloud albedo feedback during global warming. The results suggest that the two common biases revealed in the simulated ENSO variability may not necessarily be carried over to the simulated global warming. These biases, however, highlight the continuing difficulty that models have in simulating accurately the feedbacks of water vapor and clouds on a time scale of the observations available.

Evaluation of climate model simulations in representing the precipitation non-stationarity by considering observational uncertainties

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yongjing Wan ◽  
Jie Chen ◽  
Ping Xie ◽  
Chong-Yu Xu ◽  
Daiyuan Li
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Extreme Precipitation ◽  
Climate Models ◽  
Climate Model ◽  
Annual Precipitation ◽  
Future Climate Change ◽  
Spatial Distributions ◽  
Model Simulations ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Climate Model Simulations

<p>The reliability of climate model simulations in representing the precipitation changes is one of the preconditions for climate-change impact studies. However, the observational uncertainties hinder the robust evaluation of these climate model simulations. The goal of the present study is to evaluate the capacities of climate model simulations in representing the precipitation non-stationarity in consideration of observational uncertainties. The mean of multiple observations (OBSE) from five observational precipitation datasets is used as a reference to quantify the uncertainty of observed precipitation and to evaluate the performance of climate model simulations. The non-stationarity of precipitation was represented using the mean and variance of annual total precipitation and annual maximum daily precipitation for the 1982–2015 period. The results show that the spatial distributions of annual and extreme precipitation are similar for various observational datasets, while there has less agreement in the variance changes of extreme precipitation. Climate models are capable of representing the spatial distributions of the annual and extreme precipitation amounts at the global scales. In terms of the non-stationarity, climate model simulations are capable of capturing the large-scale spatial pattern of the trend in mean for annual precipitation. On the contrary, the simulations are less reliable in reproducing the change of extreme precipitation, as well as the trend of variance for annual precipitation. Overall, climate models are more reliable in simulating the mean of precipitation than the variance, and they are more reliable in simulating annual precipitation than extreme. Besides, the uncertainties of precipitation for both observations and simulations are much larger in monsoon regions than in other regions. This study suggests that considering observational uncertainties is necessary when using observational datasets as the reference to project future climate change and assess the impact of climate change on environments.</p>

scholarly journals Walker Circulation controls ENSO Atmospheric Feedbacks in Uncoupled and Coupled Climate Model Simulations

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tobias Bayr ◽  
Dietmar Dommenget ◽  
Mojib Latif
Keyword(s):  
Cloud Cover ◽  
Climate Models ◽  
Deep Convection ◽  
Walker Circulation ◽  
Equatorial Pacific ◽  
Coupled Models ◽  
Sst Bias ◽  
Atmospheric Feedbacks ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Mean State

<p><span><span>Many climate models strongly underestimate the two most important atmospheric feedbacks operating in El Niño/Southern Oscillation (ENSO), the positive (amplifying) zonal surface wind feedback and negative (damping) surface-heat flux feedback (hereafter ENSO atmospheric feedbacks, EAF), hampering realistic representation of ENSO dynamics in these models. Here we show that the atmospheric components of climate models participating in the 5</span></span><sup><span><span>th</span></span></sup><span><span> phase of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP5) when forced by observed sea surface temperatures (SST), already underestimate EAF on average by 23%, but less than their coupled counterparts (on average by 54%). There is a pronounced tendency of atmosphere models to simulate stronger EAF, when they exhibit a stronger mean deep convection and enhanced cloud cover over the western equatorial Pacific (WEP), indicative of a stronger rising branch of the Pacific Walker Circulation (PWC). Further, differences in the mean deep convection over the WEP between the coupled and uncoupled models explain a large part of the differences in EAF, with the deep convection in the coupled models strongly depending on the equatorial Pacific SST bias. Experiments with a single atmosphere model support the relation between the equatorial Pacific atmospheric mean state, the SST bias and the EAF. An implemented cold SST bias in the observed SST forcing weakens deep convection and reduces cloud cover in the rising branch of the PWC, causing weaker EAF. A warm SST bias has the opposite effect. Our results elucidate how biases in the mean state of the PWC and equatorial SST hamper a realistic simulation of the EAF. </span></span></p>

scholarly journals Measuring and modelling evapotranspiration in a South African grassland: Comparison of two improved Penman-Monteith formulations

Water SA ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 44 (3 July) ◽  
Author(s):  
Onalenna Gwate ◽  
Sukhmani K Mantel ◽  
Anthony R Palmer ◽  
Lesley A Gibson ◽  
Zahn Munch
Keyword(s):  
South African ◽  
Climate Models ◽  
Meteorological Data ◽  
Area Index ◽  
Use Of Data ◽  
Model Predictions ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Study Sites ◽  
Atmospheric Changes

Accurately measuring evapotranspiration (ET) is important in the context of global atmospheric changes and for use with climate models. Direct ET measurement is costly to apply widely and local calibration and validation of ET models developed elsewhere improves confidence in ET derived from such models. This study sought to compare the performance of the Penman-Monteith-Leuning (PML) and Penman-Monteith-Palmer (PMP) ET models, over mesic grasslands in two study sites in South Africa. The study used routine meteorological data from a scientific-grade automatic weather station (AWS) to apply the PML and PMP models. The PML model was calibrated at one site and validated in both sites. On the other hand, the PMP model does not require calibration and hence it was validated in both sites. The models were validated using ET derived from a large aperture scintillometer (LAS). The PML model performed well at both sites with root mean square error (RMSE) within 20% of the mean daily observed ET (R2 of 0.83 to 0.91). Routine meteorological data were able to reproduce fluxes calculated using micrometeorological techniques and this increased the confidence in the use of data from sparsely distributed AWSs to derive reasonable ET values. The PML model was better able to simulate observed ET compared to the PMP model, since the former models both transpiration and soil evaporation (ES), while the latter only models transpiration. Hence, the PMP model systematically underestimated ET in a context where the leaf area index (LAI) was < 2.5. Model predictions in the grasslands could be improved by incorporating the ES component in the PMP model while the PML model could be improved by careful choice of the number of days to be used in the determination of the fraction of ES.

scholarly journals Predicted Future Benefits for an Endemic Rodent in the Irano-Turanian Region

Climate ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 16
Author(s):  
Suzanna Meeussen ◽  
Anouschka Hof
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Climate Models ◽  
Species Distribution Modelling ◽  
Geographic Range ◽  
Future Climate ◽  
Future Climate Change ◽  
Distribution Ranges ◽  
Bioclimatic Variables ◽  
Suitable Area ◽  
The Impact

Climate change is expected to have an impact on the geographical distribution ranges of species. Endemic species and those with a restricted geographic range may be especially vulnerable. The Persian jird (Meriones persicus) is an endemic rodent inhabiting the mountainous areas of the Irano-Turanian region, where future desertification may form a threat to the species. In this study, the species distribution modelling algorithm MaxEnt was used to assess the impact of future climate change on the geographic distribution range of the Persian jird. Predictions were made under two Representative Concentration Pathways and five different climate models for the years 2050 and 2070. It was found that both bioclimatic variables and land use variables were important in determining potential suitability of the region for the species to occur. In most cases, the future predictions showed an expansion of the geographic range of the Persian jird which indicates that the species is not under immediate threat. There are however uncertainties with regards to its current range. Predictions may therefore be an over or underestimation of the total suitable area. Further research is thus needed to confirm the current geographic range of the Persian jird to be able to improve assessments of the impact of future climate change.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document