ESMValTool (v1.0) – a community diagnostic and performance metrics tool for routine evaluation of Earth System Models in CMIP

Eyring, Veronika; Righi, Mattia; Evaldsson, Martin; Lauer, Axel; Wenzel, Sabrina; Jones, Colin; Anav, Alessandro; Andrews, Oliver; Cionni, Irene; Davin, Edouard L.; Deser, Clara; Ehbrecht, Carsten; Friedlingstein, Pierre; Gleckler, P. J.; Gottschaldt, Klaus-Dirk; Hagemann, Stefan; Juckes, Martin; Kindermann, Stephan; Krasting, John P.; Kunert, Dominik; Levine, Richard C.; Loew, Alexander; Mäkelä, Jarmo; Martin, Gill; Mason, Erik; Phillips, Adam S.; Read, Simon; Rio, Catherine; Roehrig, Romain; Senftleben, Daniel; Sterl, Andreas; Ulft, L. H. van; Walton, Jeremy; Wang, S.; Williams, Keith D.

doi:10.5194/gmdd-8-7541-2015

Cited by 30 publications

(40 citation statements)

References 184 publications

(210 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…12. Figures 12 and S18 were produced with the ESMValTool Eyring et al, 2015). The data were first monthly then annually averaged and the values of ERA-Interim were subtracted from the simulation results.…”

Section: Temperature Profilesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Earth System Chemistry integrated Modelling (ESCiMo) with the Modular Earth Submodel System (MESSy) version 2.51

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Three types of reference simulations, as recommended by the Chemistry-Climate Model Initiative (CCMI), have been performed with version 2.51 of the European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts -Hamburg (ECHAM)/Modular Earth Submodel System (MESSy) Atmospheric Chemistry (EMAC) model: hindcast simulations , hindcast simulations with specified dynamics , i.e. nudged towards ERA-Interim reanalysis data, and combined hindcast and projection simulations . The manuscript summarizes the updates of the model system and details the different model set-ups used, including the on-line calculated diagnostics. Simulations have been performed with two different nudging setups, with and without interactive tropospheric aerosol, and with and without a coupled ocean model. Two different vertical resolutions have been applied. The on-line calculated sources and sinks of reactive species are quantified and a first evaluation of the simulation results from a global perspective is provided as a quality check of the data. The focus is on the intercomparison of the different model set-ups. The simulation data will become publicly available via CCMI and the Climate and Environmental Retrieval and Archive (CERA) database of the German Climate Computing Centre (DKRZ). This manuscript is intended to serve as an extensive reference for further analyses of the Earth System Chemistry integrated Modelling (ESCiMo) simulations.

show abstract

Section: Temperature Profilesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Earth System Chemistry integrated Modelling (ESCiMo) with the Modular Earth Submodel System (MESSy) version 2.51

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Skill-score metrics are expected to be widely used in the framework of the upcoming CMIP6 (Meehl et al, 2014) with the development of international community benchmarking tools like the ESMValTool (http://www.pa.op.dlr.de/ ESMValTool; see also Eyring et al, 2015). The assessment of model skill to reproduce observations will focus on the modern period.…”

Section: Conclusion and Recommendation For Future Intercomparison Exmentioning

confidence: 99%

Inconsistent strategies to spin up models in CMIP5: implications for ocean biogeochemical model performance assessment

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. During the fifth phase of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP5) substantial efforts were made to systematically assess the skill of Earth system models. One goal was to check how realistically representative marine biogeochemical tracer distributions could be reproduced by models. In routine assessments model historical hindcasts were compared with available modern biogeochemical observations. However, these assessments considered neither how close modeled biogeochemical reservoirs were to equilibrium nor the sensitivity of model performance to initial conditions or to the spin-up protocols. Here, we explore how the large diversity in spin-up protocols used for marine biogeochemistry in CMIP5 Earth system models (ESMs) contributes to model-to-model differences in the simulated fields. We take advantage of a 500-year spin-up simulation of IPSL-CM5A-LR to quantify the influence of the spin-up protocol on model ability to reproduce relevant data fields. Amplification of biases in selected biogeochemical fields (O 2 , NO 3 , Alk-DIC) is assessed as a function of spin-up duration. We demonstrate that a relationship between spin-up duration and assessment metrics emerges from our model results and holds when confronted with a larger ensemble of CMIP5 models. This shows that drift has implications for performance assessment in addition to possibly aliasing estimates of climate change impact. Our study suggests that differences in spin-up protocols could explain a substantial part of model disparities, constituting a source of modelto-model uncertainty. This requires more attention in future Published by Copernicus Publications on behalf of the European Geosciences Union. R. Séférian et al.: Inconsistent strategies to spin up models in CMIP5model intercomparison exercises in order to provide quantitatively more correct ESM results on marine biogeochemistry and carbon cycle feedbacks.

show abstract

“…VIACS guidance will support the development of online metrics and visualizations for the VIACS community of researchers, practitioners, stakeholders, and decision-makers (potentially thought platforms such as ESMValTool, Eyring et al, 2016b). These include metrics and derived variables made through a combination of climate outputs or sector-specific thresholds (e.g., frostfree days for agriculture, over-winter minimum temperatures for health and ecosystems, days of airplane weight restriction due to temperatures), potentially in collaboration with the Expert Team on Climate Change Detection and Indices (Sillmann et al, 2013a, b).…”

Section: Future Activitiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…By formalizing this process and involving leaders from each community, the VIACS Advisory Board aims to enhance the societal benefit of climate information. Eyring et al (2016), and each of these CMIP6-Endorsed MIPs is described in more detail in a separate contribution to this Special Issue. Eyring et al, 2016a) and continues in its role of systematically inter-comparing climate models and making outputs available to the applications communities in support of all three Working Groups of the Sixth IPCC Assessment Report (AR6) cycle.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Vulnerability, Impacts, Adaptation and Climate Services Advisory Board (VIACS AB v1.0) contribution to CMIP6

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. This paper describes the motivation for the creation of the Vulnerability, Impacts, Adaptation and Climate Services (VIACS) Advisory Board for the Sixth Phase of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP6), its initial activities, and its plans to serve as a bridge between climate change applications experts and climate modelers. The climate change application community comprises researchers and other specialists who use climate information (alongside socioeconomic and other environmental information) to analyze vulnerability, impacts, and adaptation of natural systems and society in relation to past, ongoing, and projected future climate change. Much of this activity is directed toward the co-development of information needed by decisionmakers for managing projected risks. CMIP6 provides a unique opportunity to facilitate a two-way dialog between climate modelers and VIACS experts who are looking to apply CMIP6 results for a wide array of research and climate services objectives. The VIACS Advisory Board convenes leaders of major impact sectors, international programs, and climate services to solicit community feedback that increases the applications relevance of the CMIP6-Endorsed Model Intercomparison Projects (MIPs). As an illustration of its potential, the VIACS community provided CMIP6 leadership with a list of prioritized climate model variables and MIP experiments of the greatest interest to the climate model applications community, indicating the applicability and societal relevance of climate model simulation outputs. The VI-ACS Advisory Board also recommended an impacts versionPublished by Copernicus Publications on behalf of the European Geosciences Union.

show abstract

ESMValTool (v1.0) – a community diagnostic and performance metrics tool for routine evaluation of Earth System Models in CMIP

Cited by 30 publications

References 184 publications

Earth System Chemistry integrated Modelling (ESCiMo) with the Modular Earth Submodel System (MESSy) version 2.51

Earth System Chemistry integrated Modelling (ESCiMo) with the Modular Earth Submodel System (MESSy) version 2.51

Inconsistent strategies to spin up models in CMIP5: implications for ocean biogeochemical model performance assessment

The Vulnerability, Impacts, Adaptation and Climate Services Advisory Board (VIACS AB v1.0) contribution to CMIP6

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About