Abstract
In spite of the yet incomplete subsample of the 5th phase of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP5) model ensemble to date, evaluation of these models is underway. Novel diagnostics and analysis methods are being utilized in order to explore the skill of particular processes, the degree to which models have improved since CMIP3, and particular features of the hindcasts, decadal and centennial projections. These assessments strongly benefit from the increasing availability of state-of-the-art data sets and model output processing techniques. Also paleo-climate analysis proves to be useful for demonstrating the ability of models to simulate climate conditions that are different from present day. The existence of an increasingly wide ensemble of model simulations re-emphasizes the need to carefully consider the implications of model spread. Disparity between projected results does imply that model uncertainty exists, but not necessarily reflects a true estimate of this uncertainty. Projections generated by models with a similar origin or utilizing parameter perturbation techniques generally show more mutual agreement than models with different development histories. Weighting results from different models is a potentially useful technique to improve projections, if the purpose of the weighting is clearly identified. However, there is yet no consensus in the community on how to best achieve this.
These findings, discussed at the session “Assessing the reliability of climate models: CMIP5” of the World Climate Research Program (WCRP) Open Science Conference (OSC), illustrate the need for comprehensive and coordinated model evaluation and data collection. The role that WCRP can play in this coordination is summarized at the end of this chapter.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Abbreviations
- AMIP:
-
Atmospheric Model Intercomparison Project
- CMIP3:
-
CMIP5 3rd, 5th Coupled Model Intercomparison Project
- ENSO:
-
El Nino Southern Oscillation
- ESM:
-
Earth System Model
- GCM:
-
General Circulation Model
- IGBP:
-
International Geosphere-Biosphere Program
- IHDP:
-
International Human Dimensions Program
- IPCC:
-
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
- ISCCP:
-
International Satellite Cloud Climatology Project
- MME:
-
Multi Model Ensemble
- OSC:
-
Open Science Conference
- PCMDI:
-
Program for Climate Model Diagnosis and Intercomparison
- PPE:
-
Perturbed Physics Ensemble
- WCRP:
-
World Climate Research Program
References
Allen RJ, Norris JR, Wild M (2012) Evaluation of multidecadal variability in CMIP5 surface solar radiation and inferred underestimation of aerosol direct effects. Submitted to J Geophys Res
Anav A, Friedlingstein P, Kidston M, Bopp L, Ciais P, Cox P, Jones C, Jung M, Myneni R, Zhu Z (2013) Evaluating the land and ocean components of the carbon cycle in the CMIP5 Earth System Models. J Climate. doi:10.1175/JCLI-D-12-00417.1 (in press)
Bates SC, Fox-Kemper B, Jayne SR, Large WG, Stevenson S, Yeager SG (2012) Mean biases, variability, and trends in air-sea fluxes and SST in the CCSM4. J Climate 25:7781–7801. doi:10.1175/JCLI-D-11-00442.1
Bodas-Salcedo A and Coauthors (2011) COSP: satellite simulation software for model assessment. Bull Am Meteorol Soc 92:1023–1043. doi:10.1175/2011BAMS2856.1
Branstator G, Teng H (2010) Two limits of initial-value decadal predictability in a CGCM. J Clim 23(23):6292–6311. doi:10.1175/2010JCLI3678.1
CLIVAR (2011) WCRP Coupled Model Intercomparison Project – Phase 5 – CMIP5 –, CLIVAR exchanges, Special issue no 56, vol 16(2), May 2011
Cox PM, Pearson D, Booth BB, Friedlingstein P, Huntingford C, Jones CD, Luke CM (2012) Sensitivity of tropical carbon to climate change constrained by carbon dioxide variability. Nature 494:341–344. doi:10.1038/nature11882
Dufresne J-L, Bony S (2008) An assessment of the primary sources of spread of global warming estimates from coupled atmosphere–ocean models. J Clim 21:5135–5144
Dwyer JG, Norris JR, Ruckstuhl C (2010) Do climate models reproduce observed solar dimming and brightening over China and Japan? J Geophys Res 115:D00K08. doi:10.1029/2009JD012945
Friedlingstein P et al (2006) Climate–carbon cycle feedback analysis: results from the C4MIP model intercomparison’. J Clim 19(15):3337–3353
Guilyardi E, Cai W, Collins M, Fedorov A, Jin F-F, Kumar A, Sun D-Z, Wittenberg A (2011) New strategies for evaluating ENSO processes in climate models. BAMS. doi:10.1175/BAMS-D-11-00106.1
Hall A, Qu X (2006) Using the current seasonal cycle to constrain snow albedo feedback in future climate change. Geophys Res Lett 33:L03502. doi:10.1029/2005GL025127
Hargreaves HC, Paul A, Ohgait R, Abe-Ouchi A, Annan JD (2011) Are paleoclimate model ensembles consistent with the MARGO data synthesis? Clim Past Discuss 7:775–807. doi:10.5194/cpd-7-775-2011
Hawkins E, Sutton RT (2009) The potential to narrow uncertainty in regional climate predictions. BAMS 90:1095. doi:10.1175/2009BAMS2607.1
Huber M, Mahlstein I, Wild M, Fasullo J, Knutti R (2011) Constraints on climate sensitivity from radiation patterns in climate models. J Clim 24:1034–1052. doi:10.1175/2010JCLI3403.1
Jacob C (2011) From regional weather to global climate; oral presentation at OSC. http://conference2011.wcrp-climate.org/abstracts/jackob_A4.pdf
Jiang JH, Su H, Zhai C, Perun VS et al (2012) Evaluation of cloud and water vapor simulations in CMIP5 climate models using NASA A-train satellite observations. J Geophys Res 117(D1410):24 pp. doi:10.1029/2011JD017237
Jung M, Reichstein M, Bondeau A (2009) Towards global empirical upscaling of FLUXNET eddy covariance observations: validation of a model tree ensemble approach using a biosphere model. Biogeosciences 6:2001–2013
Knutti R (2008) Should we believe model predictions of future climate change? Trienn Issue Earth Sci Philos Trans R Soc A 366:4647–4664. doi:10.1098/rsta.2008.0169
Knutti R et al (2010) Good practice guidance paper on assessing and combining multi model climate projections. In: Stocker TF, Qin D, Plattner G.-K, Tignor M, Midgley PM (eds) Meeting report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change expert meeting on assessing and combining multi model climate Projections, IPCC Working Group I Technical Support Unit, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland
MARGO Project Members (2009) Constraints on the magnitude and patterns of ocean cooling at the Last Glacial Maximum. Nat Geosci 2:127–132. doi:10.1038/ngeo411
Masson D, Knutti R (2011) Climate model genealogy. Geophys Res Lett 38:L08703. doi:10.1029/2011GL046864
Matei D, Baehr J, Jungclaus JH, Haak H, Müller WA, Marotzke J (2012) Multiyear prediction of monthly mean atlantic meridional overturning circulation at 26.5°N. Science 335:76–79. doi:10.1126/science.1210299
Msadek R (2011) Comparing the meridional heat transport at 26.5ºN and its relationship with the MOC in two CMIP5 coupled models and in RAPID-array observations (oral presentation WCRP OSC Denver, Oct 2011)
Reichler T, Kim J (2008) How well do coupled models simulate today’s climate? Bull Am Meteorol Soc 89:303–311
Sakaguchi K, Xubin Z, Brunke MA (2012) Temporal- and spatial-scale dependence of three CMIP3 climate models in simulating the surface temperature trend in the twentieth century. J Clim 25:2456–2470. doi:10.1175/JCLI-D-11-00106.1, http://dx.doi.org/
Schmittner A, Urban NM, Shakun JD, Mahowald NM, Clark PU, Bartlein PJ, Mix AC, Rosell-Melé A (2011) Climate ensitivity estimated from temperature reconstructions of the last glacial maximum. Science 334(6061):1385–1388. doi:10.1126/science.1203513
Taylor KE, Stouffer RJ, Meehl GA (2012) An overview of CMIP5 and the experiment design. Bull Am Meteorol Soc 93:485–498
Teixeira J, Waliser D, Ferraro R, Gleckler P, Potter G (2011) Satellite observations for CMIP5 simulations. CLIVAR Exchanges No. 56, 16(2) May 2011
Williams KD, Webb MJ (2009) A quantitative performance assessment of cloud regimes in climate models. Clim Dyn 33:141–157. doi:10.1007/s00382-008-0443-1
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2013 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
van den Hurk, B. et al. (2013). Assessing the Reliability of Climate Models, CMIP5. In: Asrar, G., Hurrell, J. (eds) Climate Science for Serving Society. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-6692-1_9
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-6692-1_9
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-007-6691-4
Online ISBN: 978-94-007-6692-1
eBook Packages: Earth and Environmental ScienceEarth and Environmental Science (R0)