scholarly journals Advances in Collaborative Documentation Support for CMIP6

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Charlotte Pascoe ◽  
David Hassell ◽  
Martina Stockhause ◽  
Mark Greenslade
Keyword(s):  
Science Communication ◽  
Scientific Community ◽  
Climate Models ◽  
Coupled Model ◽  
Automatic Generation ◽  
Earth System ◽  
The Earth ◽  
Data Citation ◽  
On Line ◽  
Intercomparison Project

<div>The Earth System Documentation (ES-DOC) project aims to nurture an ecosystem of tools & services in support of Earth System documentation creation, analysis and dissemination. Such an ecosystem enables the scientific community to better understand and utilise Earth system model data.</div><div>The ES-DOC infrastructure for the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6) modelling groups to describe their climate models and make the documentation available on-line has been available for 18 months, and more recently the automatic generation of documentation of every published simulation has meant that every CMIP6 dataset within the Earth System Grid Federation (ESGF) is now immediately connected to the ES-DOC description of the entire workflow that created it, via a “further info URL”.</div><div>The further info URL is a landing page from which all of the relevant CMIP6 documentation relevant to the data may be accessed, including experimental design, model formulation and ensemble description, as well as providing links to the data citation information.</div><div>These DOI landing pages are part of the Citation Service, provided by DKRZ. Data citation information is also available independently through the ESGF Search portal or in the DataCite search or Google’s dataset search. It provides users of CMIP6 data with the formal citation that should accompany any use of the datasets that comprise their analysis.</div><div>ES-DOC services and the Citation Service form a CMIP6 project  collaboration, and depend upon structured documentation provided by the scientific community. Structured scientific metadata has an important role in science communication, however it’s creation and collation exacts a cost in time, energy and attention.  We discuss progress towards a balance between the ease of information collection and the complexity of our information handling structures.</div><div> </div><div>CMIP6: https://pcmdi.llnl.gov/CMIP6/</div><div>ES-DOC: https://es-doc.org/</div><div>Further Info URL: https://es-doc.org/cmip6-ensembles-further-info-url</div><div> <p>Citation Service: http://cmip6cite.wdc-climate.de</p> </div>

scholarly journals The global dust cycle and uncertainty in CMIP5 (Coupled Model Intercomparison Project phase 5) models

2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (17) ◽  
pp. 10401-10425
Author(s):  
Chenglai Wu ◽  
Zhaohui Lin ◽  
Xiaohong Liu
Keyword(s):  
Wet Deposition ◽  
Climate Models ◽  
Dust Emission ◽  
Coupled Model ◽  
Dust Particles ◽  
Earth System ◽  
Model Intercomparison ◽  
Dust Deposition ◽  
The Earth ◽  
Intercomparison Project

Abstract. The dust cycle is an important component of the Earth system and has been implemented in climate models and Earth system models (ESMs). An assessment of the dust cycle in these models is vital to address their strengths and weaknesses in simulating dust aerosol and its interactions with the Earth system and enhance the future model developments. This study presents a comprehensive evaluation of the global dust cycle in 15 models participating in the fifth phase of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP5). The various models are compared with each other and with an aerosol reanalysis as well as station observations. The results show that the global dust emission in these models varies by a factor of 4–5 for the same size range. The models generally agree with each other and observations in reproducing the “dust belt”, which extends from North Africa, the Middle East, Central and South Asia to East Asia, although they differ greatly in the spatial extent of this dust belt. The models also differ in other dust source regions such as North America and Australia. We suggest that the coupling of dust emission with dynamic vegetation can enlarge the range of simulated dust emission. For the removal process, all the models estimate that wet deposition is smaller than dry deposition and wet deposition accounts for 12 %–39 % of total deposition. The models also estimate that most (77 %–91 %) dust particles are deposited onto continents and 9 %–23 % of dust particles are deposited into oceans. Compared to the observations, most models reproduce the dust deposition and dust concentrations within a factor of 10 at most stations, but larger biases by more than a factor of 10 are also noted at specific regions and for certain models. These results highlight the need for further improvements of the dust cycle especially on dust emission in climate models.

Workflow and tools to analyse the PMIP4-CMIP6 ensemble

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anni Zhao ◽  
Chris Brierley
Keyword(s):  
Case Studies ◽  
Coupled Model ◽  
Important Case ◽  
Earth System ◽  
Model Intercomparison ◽  
Past Climate ◽  
The Past ◽  
The Earth ◽  
Intercomparison Project

<p>Experiment outputs are now available from the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project’s 6<sup>th</sup> phase (CMIP6) and the past climate experiments defined in the Model Intercomparison Project’s 4<sup>th</sup> phase (PMIP4). All of this output is freely available from the Earth System Grid Federation (ESGF). Yet there are overheads in analysing this resource that may prove complicated or prohibitive. Here we document the steps taken by ourselves to produce ensemble analyses covering past and future simulations. We outline the strategy used to curate, adjust the monthly calendar aggregation and process the information downloaded from the ESGF. The results of these steps were used to perform analysis for several of the initial publications arising from PMIP4. We provide post-processed fields for each simulation, such as climatologies and common measures of variability. Example scripts used to visualise and analyse these fields is provided for several important case studies.</p>

scholarly journals Estimating Remaining Carbon Budgets Using Emulators of CMIP6 Models

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Martin Rypdal ◽  
Niklas Boers ◽  
Hege-Beate Fredriksen ◽  
Kai-Uwe Eiselt ◽  
Andreas Johansen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Co2 Emissions ◽  
Climate Sensitivity ◽  
Carbon Budget ◽  
Climate Models ◽  
Coupled Model ◽  
High Sensitivity ◽  
Earth System ◽  
Transient Climate Response ◽  
Uncertainty Range ◽  
Intercomparison Project

Abstract A remaining carbon budget (RCB) estimates how much CO2 we can emit and still reach a specific temperature target. The RCB concept is attractive since it easily communicates to the public and policymakers, but RCBs are also subject to uncertainties. The expected warming levels for a given carbon budget has a wide uncertainty range, which we show here to increase with less ambitious targets, i.e., with higher CO2 emissions and temperatures. Leading causes of RCB uncertainty are the future non-CO2 emissions, Earth system feedbacks, and the spread in the climate sensitivity among climate models. The latter is investigated in this paper, using simple emulators of Earth System Models in the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6) ensemble. It is shown that the transient climate response to cumulative emissions of carbon (TCRE) is approximately proportional to the effective equilibrium climate sensitivity (ECS). For temperature targets between 1.5-3.0 degrees C, the models exhibiting low ECS increase RCB by a factor two compared to those with high sensitivity, suggesting that observational constraints imposed on the ECS in the model ensemble also will reduce uncertainty in the RCB estimates.

scholarly journals Describing Earth System Simulations with the Metafor CIM

2012 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 1669-1689 ◽  
Author(s):  
B. N. Lawrence ◽  
V. Balaji ◽  
P. Bentley ◽  
S. Callaghan ◽  
C. DeLuca ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Coupled Model ◽  
System Modelling ◽  
Earth System ◽  
Model Intercomparison ◽  
Controlled Vocabularies ◽  
Common Information ◽  
The Earth ◽  
Common Information Model ◽  
Intercomparison Project ◽  
Near Term

Abstract. The Metafor project has developed a Common Information Model (CIM) using the ISO1900 series formalism to describe the sorts of numerical experiments carried out by the earth system modelling community, the models they use, and the simulations that result. Here we describe the mechanism by which the CIM was developed, and its key properties. We introduce the conceptual and application versions and the controlled vocabularies developed in the context of supporting the fifth Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP5). We describe how the CIM has been used in experiments to describe model coupling properties and describe the near term expected evolution of the CIM.

scholarly journals Set-up of the PMIP3 paleoclimate experiments conducted using an Earth system model, MIROC-ESM

2013 ◽  
Vol 6 (3) ◽  
pp. 819-836 ◽  
Author(s):  
T. Sueyoshi ◽  
R. Ohgaito ◽  
A. Yamamoto ◽  
M. O. Chikamoto ◽  
T. Hajima ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Climate Models ◽  
Climate Model ◽  
Global Climate ◽  
Global Climate Model ◽  
Coupled Model ◽  
Volcanic Eruptions ◽  
Earth System ◽  
Good Test ◽  
Effective Measure ◽  
Intercomparison Project

Abstract. Paleoclimate experiments using contemporary climate models are an effective measure to evaluate climate models. In recent years, Earth system models (ESMs) were developed to investigate carbon cycle climate feedbacks, as well as to project the future climate. Paleoclimate events can be suitable benchmarks to evaluate ESMs. The variation in aerosols associated with the volcanic eruptions provide a clear signal in forcing, which can be a good test to check the response of a climate model to the radiation changes. The variations in atmospheric CO2 level or changes in ice sheet extent can be used for evaluation as well. Here we present implementations of the paleoclimate experiments proposed by the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project phase 5/Paleoclimate Modelling Intercomparison Project phase 3 (CMIP5/PMIP3) using MIROC-ESM, an ESM based on the global climate model MIROC (Model for Interdisciplinary Research on Climate). In this paper, experimental settings and spin-up procedures of the mid-Holocene, the Last Glacial Maximum, and the Last Millennium experiments are explained. The first two experiments are time slice experiments and the last one is a transient experiment. The complexity of the model requires various steps to correctly configure the experiments. Several basic outputs are also shown.

scholarly journals A community diagnostic tool for chemistry climate model validation

2012 ◽  
Vol 5 (5) ◽  
pp. 1061-1073 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. Gettelman ◽  
V. Eyring ◽  
C. Fischer ◽  
H. Shiona ◽  
I. Cionni ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Model Validation ◽  
Climate Models ◽  
Climate Model ◽  
Model Development ◽  
Coupled Model ◽  
Technical Note ◽  
The Earth ◽  
Complex Evaluation ◽  
System User ◽  
Intercomparison Project

Abstract. This technical note presents an overview of the Chemistry-Climate Model Validation Diagnostic (CCMVal-Diag) tool for model evaluation. The CCMVal-Diag tool is a flexible and extensible open source package that facilitates the complex evaluation of global models. Models can be compared to other models, ensemble members (simulations with the same model), and/or many types of observations. The initial construction and application is to coupled chemistry-climate models (CCMs) participating in CCMVal, but the evaluation of climate models that submitted output to the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP) is also possible. The package has been used to assist with analysis of simulations for the 2010 WMO/UNEP Scientific Ozone Assessment and the SPARC Report on the Evaluation of CCMs. The CCMVal-Diag tool is described and examples of how it functions are presented, along with links to detailed descriptions, instructions and source code. The CCMVal-Diag tool supports model development as well as quantifies model changes, both for different versions of individual models and for different generations of community-wide collections of models used in international assessments. The code allows further extensions by different users for different applications and types, e.g. to other components of the Earth system. User modifications are encouraged and easy to perform with minimum coding.

scholarly journals Global dust cycle and uncertainty in CMIP5 models

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chenglai Wu ◽  
Zhaohui Lin ◽  
Xiaohong Liu
Keyword(s):  
Wet Deposition ◽  
Climate Models ◽  
Dust Emission ◽  
Coupled Model ◽  
Dust Particles ◽  
Cmip5 Models ◽  
Earth System ◽  
Dust Deposition ◽  
Total Deposition ◽  
The Earth

Abstract. Dust cycle is an important component of the Earth system and have been implemented into climate models and Earth System Models (ESMs). An assessment of the dust cycle in these models is vital to address the strengths and weaknesses of these models in simulating dust aerosol and its interactions with the Earth system and enhance the future model developments. This study presents a comprehensive evaluation of global dust cycle in 15 models participating in the fifth phase of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP5). The various models are compared with each other and with an aerosol reanalysis as well as station observations of dust deposition and concentrations. The results show that the global dust emission in these models ranges from 735 to 8186 Tg yr−1 and the annual mean dust burden ranges from 2.5 to 41.9 Tg, both of which scatter by a factor of about 10–20. The models generally agree with each other and observations in reproducing the dust belt that extends from North Africa, Middle East, Central and South Asia, to East Asia, although they differ largely in the spatial extent of this dust belt. The models also differ in other dust source regions such as North America and Australia, where the contributions of these sources to global dust emissions vary by a factor of more than 500. We suggest that the coupling of dust emission with dynamic vegetation can enlarge the range of simulated dust emission. For the removal process, all the models estimate that wet deposition is a smaller sink than dry deposition and wet deposition accounts for 12–39 % of total deposition. The models also estimate that most (77–91 %) of dust particles are deposited onto continents and 9–23 % of them are deposited into oceans. A linear relationship between dust burden, lifetime, and fraction of wet deposition to total deposition from these models suggests a general consistency among the models. Compared to the observations, most models reproduce the dust deposition and dust concentrations within a factor of 10 at most stations, but larger biases by more than a factor of 10 are also noted at specific regions and for certain models. These results cast a doubt on the interpretation of the simulations of dust-affected fields in climate models and highlight the need for further improvements of dust cycle especially on dust emission in climate models.

scholarly journals Documenting numerical experiments in support of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6)

2020 ◽  
Vol 13 (5) ◽  
pp. 2149-2167 ◽  
Author(s):  
Charlotte Pascoe ◽  
Bryan N. Lawrence ◽  
Eric Guilyardi ◽  
Martin Juckes ◽  
Karl E. Taylor
Keyword(s):  
Numerical Experiments ◽  
Coupled Model ◽  
Added Value ◽  
Earth System ◽  
Sources Of Information ◽  
Model Intercomparison ◽  
Multiple Sources ◽  
The Earth ◽  
Nature Of Information ◽  
Intercomparison Project

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.

scholarly journals Describing Earth system simulations with the Metafor CIM

2012 ◽  
Vol 5 (6) ◽  
pp. 1493-1500 ◽  
Author(s):  
B. N. Lawrence ◽  
V. Balaji ◽  
P. Bentley ◽  
S. Callaghan ◽  
C. DeLuca ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Coupled Model ◽  
System Modelling ◽  
Earth System ◽  
Model Intercomparison ◽  
Controlled Vocabularies ◽  
Common Information ◽  
The Earth ◽  
Common Information Model ◽  
Intercomparison Project ◽  
Near Term

Abstract. The Metafor project has developed a common information model (CIM) using the ISO19100 series formalism to describe numerical experiments carried out by the Earth system modelling community, the models they use, and the simulations that result. Here we describe the mechanism by which the CIM was developed, and its key properties. We introduce the conceptual and application versions and the controlled vocabularies developed in the context of supporting the fifth Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP5). We describe how the CIM has been used in experiments to describe model coupling properties and describe the near term expected evolution of the CIM.

scholarly journals The EC-Earth3 Earth System Model for the Climate Model Intercomparison Project 6

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ralf Döscher ◽  
Mario Acosta ◽  
Andrea Alessandri ◽  
Peter Anthoni ◽  
Almut Arneth ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Physical Performance ◽  
Performance Metrics ◽  
Climate Model ◽  
Earth System Model ◽  
System Model ◽  
Historical Period ◽  
Earth System ◽  
Dynamic Features ◽  
The Earth ◽  
Intercomparison Project

Abstract. The Earth System Model EC-Earth3 for contributions to CMIP6 is documented here, with its flexible coupling framework, major model configurations, a methodology for ensuring the simulations are comparable across different HPC systems, and with the physical performance of base configurations over the historical period. The variety of possible configurations and sub-models reflects the broad interests in the EC-Earth community. EC-Earth3 key performance metrics demonstrate physical behaviour and biases well within the frame known from recent CMIP models. With improved physical and dynamic features, new ESM components, community tools, and largely improved physical performance compared to the CMIP5 version, EC-Earth3 represents a clear step forward for the only European community ESM. We demonstrate here that EC-Earth3 is suited for a range of tasks in CMIP6 and beyond.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document