This work documents the first version of the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) new EnergyExascale Earth System Model (E3SMv1). We focus on the standard resolution of the fully coupled physical model designed to address DOE mission-relevant water cycle questions. Its components include atmosphere and land (110-km grid spacing), ocean and sea ice (60 km in the midlatitudes and 30 km at the equator and poles), and river transport (55 km) models. This base configuration will also serve as a foundation for additional configurations exploring higher horizontal resolution as well as augmented capabilities in the form of biogeochemistry and cryosphere configurations. The performance of E3SMv1 is evaluated by means of a standard set of Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6) Diagnosis, Evaluation, and Characterization of Klima simulations consisting of a long preindustrial control, historical simulations (ensembles of fully coupled and prescribed SSTs) as well as idealized CO 2 forcing simulations. The model performs well overall with biases typical of other CMIP-class models, although the simulated Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation is weaker than many CMIP-class models. While the E3SMv1 historical ensemble captures the bulk of the observed warming between preindustrial (1850) and present day, the trajectory of the warming diverges from observations in the Key Points: • This work documents E3SMv1, the first version of the U.S. DOE Energy Exascale Earth System Model • The performance of E3SMv1 is documented with a set of standard CMIP6 DECK and historical simulations comprising nearly 3,000 years • E3SMv1 has a high equilibrium climate sensitivity (5.3 K) and strong aerosol-related effective radiative forcing (-1.65 W/m 2 ) Correspondence to: Chris Golaz, golaz1@llnl.gov Citation: Golaz, J.-C., Caldwell, P. M., Van Roekel, L. P., Petersen, M. R., Tang, Q., Wolfe, J. D., et al. (2019). The DOE E3SM coupled model version 1: Overview and evaluation at standard resolution. second half of the twentieth century with a period of delayed warming followed by an excessive warming trend. Using a two-layer energy balance model, we attribute this divergence to the model's strong aerosol-related effective radiative forcing (ERF ari+aci = −1.65 W/m 2 ) and high equilibrium climate sensitivity (ECS = 5.3 K). Plain Language Summary The U.S. Department of Energy funded the development of a new state-of-the-art Earth system model for research and applications relevant to its mission. The Energy Exascale Earth System Model version 1 (E3SMv1) consists of five interacting components for the global atmosphere, land surface, ocean, sea ice, and rivers. Three of these components (ocean, sea ice, and river) are new and have not been coupled into an Earth system model previously. The atmosphere and land surface components were created by extending existing components part of the Community Earth System Model, Version 1. E3SMv1's capabilities are demonstrated by performing a set of standardized simulation experiments described by...

An artificial intelligence algorithm differentiated between COVID-19 pneumonia and non-COVID-19 pneumonia in chest x-ray radiographs with high sensitivity and specificity.

Many weather forecast and climate models simulate warm surface air temperature (T2m) biases over midlatitude continents during the summertime, especially over the Great Plains. We present here one of a series of papers from a multimodel intercomparison project (CAUSES: Cloud Above the United States and Errors at the Surface), which aims to evaluate the role of cloud, radiation, and precipitation biases in contributing to the T2m bias using a short‐term hindcast approach during the spring and summer of 2011. Observations are mainly from the Atmospheric Radiation Measurement Southern Great Plains sites. The present study examines the contributions of surface energy budget errors. All participating models simulate too much net shortwave and longwave fluxes at the surface but with no consistent mean bias sign in turbulent fluxes over the Central United States and Southern Great Plains. Nevertheless, biases in the net shortwave and downward longwave fluxes as well as surface evaporative fraction (EF) are contributors to T2m bias. Radiation biases are largely affected by cloud simulations, while EF bias is largely affected by soil moisture modulated by seasonal accumulated precipitation and evaporation. An approximate equation based upon the surface energy budget is derived to further quantify the magnitudes of radiation and EF contributions to T2m bias. Our analysis ascribes that a large EF underestimate is the dominant source of error in all models with a large positive temperature bias, whereas an EF overestimate compensates for an excess of absorbed shortwave radiation in nearly all the models with the smallest temperature bias.

Many Numerical Weather Prediction (NWP) and climate models exhibit too warm lower tropospheres near the midlatitude continents. The warm bias has been shown to coincide with important surface radiation biases that likely play a critical role in the inception or the growth of the warm bias. This paper presents an attribution study on the net radiation biases in nine model simulations, performed in the framework of the CAUSES project (Clouds Above the United States and Errors at the Surface). Contributions from deficiencies in the surface properties, clouds, water vapor, and aerosols are quantified, using an array of radiation measurement stations near the Atmospheric Radiation Measurement Southern Great Plains site. Furthermore, an in‐depth analysis is shown to attribute the radiation errors to specific cloud regimes. The net surface shortwave radiation is overestimated in all models throughout most of the simulation period. Cloud errors are shown to contribute most to this overestimation, although nonnegligible contributions from the surface albedo exist in most models. Missing deep cloud events and/or simulating deep clouds with too weak cloud radiative effects dominate in the cloud‐related radiation errors. Some models have compensating errors between excessive occurrence of deep cloud but largely underestimating their radiative effect, while other models miss deep cloud events altogether. Surprisingly, even the latter models tend to produce too much and too frequent afternoon surface precipitation. This suggests that rather than issues with the triggering of deep convection, cloud radiative deficiencies are related to too weak convective cloud detrainment and too large precipitation efficiencies.