We document the configuration and emergent simulation features from the Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory (GFDL) OM4.0 ocean/sea ice model. OM4 serves as the ocean/sea ice component for the GFDL climate and Earth system models. It is also used for climate science research and is contributing to the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project version 6 Ocean Model Intercomparison Project. The ocean component of OM4 uses version 6 of the Modular Ocean Model and the sea ice component uses version 2 of the Sea Ice Simulator, which have identical horizontal grid layouts (Arakawa C‐grid). We follow the Coordinated Ocean‐sea ice Reference Experiments protocol to assess simulation quality across a broad suite of climate‐relevant features. We present results from two versions differing by horizontal grid spacing and physical parameterizations: OM4p5 has nominal 0.5° spacing and includes mesoscale eddy parameterizations and OM4p25 has nominal 0.25° spacing with no mesoscale eddy parameterization. Modular Ocean Model version 6 makes use of a vertical Lagrangian‐remap algorithm that enables general vertical coordinates. We show that use of a hybrid depth‐isopycnal coordinate reduces the middepth ocean warming drift commonly found in pure z* vertical coordinate ocean models. To test the need for the mesoscale eddy parameterization used in OM4p5, we examine the results from a simulation that removes the eddy parameterization. The water mass structure and model drift are physically degraded relative to OM4p5, thus supporting the key role for a mesoscale closure at this resolution.

In Part 2 of this two‐part paper, documentation is provided of key aspects of a version of the AM4.0/LM4.0 atmosphere/land model that will serve as a base for a new set of climate and Earth system models (CM4 and ESM4) under development at NOAA's Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory (GFDL). The quality of the simulation in AMIP (Atmospheric Model Intercomparison Project) mode has been provided in Part 1. Part 2 provides documentation of key components and some sensitivities to choices of model formulation and values of parameters, highlighting the convection parameterization and orographic gravity wave drag. The approach taken to tune the model's clouds to observations is a particular focal point. Care is taken to describe the extent to which aerosol effective forcing and Cess sensitivity have been tuned through the model development process, both of which are relevant to the ability of the model to simulate the evolution of temperatures over the last century when coupled to an ocean model.

In this two‐part paper, a description is provided of a version of the AM4.0/LM4.0 atmosphere/land model that will serve as a base for a new set of climate and Earth system models (CM4 and ESM4) under development at NOAA's Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory (GFDL). This version, with roughly 100 km horizontal resolution and 33 levels in the vertical, contains an aerosol model that generates aerosol fields from emissions and a “light” chemistry mechanism designed to support the aerosol model but with prescribed ozone. In Part 1, the quality of the simulation in AMIP (Atmospheric Model Intercomparison Project) mode—with prescribed sea surface temperatures (SSTs) and sea‐ice distribution—is described and compared with previous GFDL models and with the CMIP5 archive of AMIP simulations. The model's Cess sensitivity (response in the top‐of‐atmosphere radiative flux to uniform warming of SSTs) and effective radiative forcing are also presented. In Part 2, the model formulation is described more fully and key sensitivities to aspects of the model formulation are discussed, along with the approach to model tuning.

A new coupled chemistry-carbon-climate Earth system model has been developed at the Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory. This model unifies component advances in chemistry, carbon, and ecosystem comprehensiveness within a single coupled climate framework. This model features much improved climate mean patterns and variability from previous chemistry and carbon coupled models.

Empirical statistical downscaling (ESD) methods seek to refine global climate model (GCM) outputs via processes that glean information from a combination of observations and GCM simulations. They aim to create value-added climate projections by reducing biases and adding finer spatial detail. Analysis techniques, such as cross-validation, allow assessments of how well ESD methods meet these goals during observational periods. However, the extent to which an ESD method's skill might differ when applied to future climate projections cannot be assessed readily in the same manner. Here we present a "perfect model" experimental design that quantifies aspects of ESD method performance for both historical and late 21st century time periods. The experimental design tests a key stationarity assumption inherent to ESD methods -namely, that ESD performance when applied to future projections is similar to that during the observational training period. Case study results employing a single ESD method (an Asynchronous Regional Regression Model variant) and climate variable (daily maximum temperature) demonstrate that violations of the stationarity assumption can vary geographically, seasonally, and with the amount of projected climate change. For the ESD method tested, the greatest challenges in downscaling daily maximum temperature projections are revealed to occur along coasts, in summer, and under conditions of Climatic Change (2016)

The World Climate Research Programme (WCRP)'s Working Group on Climate Modelling (WGCM) Infrastructure Panel (WIP) was formed in 2014 in response to the explosive growth in size and complexity of Coupled Model Intercomparison Projects (CMIPs) between CMIP3 (2005)(2006) and CMIP5 (2011CMIP5 ( -2012. This article presents the WIP recommendations for the global data infrastructure needed to support CMIP design, future growth, and evolution. Developed in close coordination with those who build and run the existing infrastructure (the Earth System Grid Federation; ESGF), the recommendations are based on several principles beginning with the need to separate requirements, implementation, and operations. Other important principles include the consideration of the diversity of community needs around data -a data ecosystem -the importance of provenance, the need for automation, and the obligation to measure costs and benefits.This paper concentrates on requirements, recognizing the diversity of communities involved (modelers, analysts, software developers, and downstream users). Such requirements include the need for scientific reproducibility and account-ability alongside the need to record and track data usage. One key element is to generate a dataset-centric rather than system-centric focus, with an aim to making the infrastructure less prone to systemic failure.With these overarching principles and requirements, the WIP has produced a set of position papers, which are summarized in the latter pages of this document. They provide specifications for managing and delivering model output, including strategies for replication and versioning, licensing, data quality assurance, citation, long-term archiving, and dataset tracking. They also describe a new and more formal approach for specifying what data, and associated metadata, should be saved, which enables future data volumes to be estimated, particularly for well-defined projects such as CMIP6.The paper concludes with a future facing consideration of the global data infrastructure evolution that follows from the blurring of boundaries between climate and weather, and the changing nature of published scientific results in the digital age.

The Sixth Assessment Report (AR6) of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has adopted the FAIR Guiding Principles. We present the Atlas chapter of Working Group I (WGI) as a test case. We describe the application of the FAIR principles in the Atlas, the challenges faced during its implementation, and those that remain for the future. We introduce the open source repository resulting from this process, including coding (e.g., annotated Jupyter notebooks), data provenance, and some aggregated datasets used in some figures in the Atlas chapter and its interactive companion (the Interactive Atlas), open to scrutiny by the scientific community and the general public. We describe the informal pilot review conducted on this repository to gather recommendations that led to significant improvements. Finally, a working example illustrates the re-use of the repository resources to produce customized regional information, extending the Interactive Atlas products and running the code interactively in a web browser using Jupyter notebooks.

No abstract