MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2998885490 · doi:10.1029/2019ms001916

The Community Earth System Model Version 2 (CESM2)

2020· article· en· W2998885490 on OpenAlexaff
Gökhan Danabasoglu, Jean‐François Lamarque, Julio T. Bacmeister, David A. Bailey, Alice K. DuVivier, James Edwards, L. K. Emmons, John Fasullo, Rolando R. García, Andrew Gettelman, Cécile Hannay, Marika M. Holland, William G. Large, P. H. Lauritzen, David M. Lawrence, Jan T. M. Lenaerts, Keith Lindsay, William H. Lipscomb, Michael Mills, Richard Neale, Keith W. Oleson, Bette L. Otto‐Bliesner, Adam S. Phillips, William J. Sacks, Simone Tilmes, Leo van Kampenhout, Mariana Vertenstein, Alice Bertini, John M. Dennis, Clara Deser, C. Fischer, Baylor Fox‐Kemper, Jennifer E. Kay, Douglas E. Kinnison, Paul J. Kushner, Vincent E. Larson, Matthew C. Long, Sheri Mickelson, J. Keith Moore, Eric Nienhouse, Lorenzo M. Polvani, Philip J. Rasch, Gary Strand

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Advances in Modeling Earth Systems · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicClimate variability and models
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNational Science Foundation
KeywordsEarth system scienceComputer scienceEarth (classical element)Environmental scienceAstrobiologyEarth scienceGeologyOceanographyMathematicsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract An overview of the Community Earth System Model Version 2 (CESM2) is provided, including a discussion of the challenges encountered during its development and how they were addressed. In addition, an evaluation of a pair of CESM2 long preindustrial control and historical ensemble simulations is presented. These simulations were performed using the nominal 1° horizontal resolution configuration of the coupled model with both the “low‐top” (40 km, with limited chemistry) and “high‐top” (130 km, with comprehensive chemistry) versions of the atmospheric component. CESM2 contains many substantial science and infrastructure improvements and new capabilities since its previous major release, CESM1, resulting in improved historical simulations in comparison to CESM1 and available observations. These include major reductions in low‐latitude precipitation and shortwave cloud forcing biases; better representation of the Madden‐Julian Oscillation; better El Niño‐Southern Oscillation‐related teleconnections; and a global land carbon accumulation trend that agrees well with observationally based estimates. Most tropospheric and surface features of the low‐ and high‐top simulations are very similar to each other, so these improvements are present in both configurations. CESM2 has an equilibrium climate sensitivity of 5.1–5.3 °C, larger than in CESM1, primarily due to a combination of relatively small changes to cloud microphysics and boundary layer parameters. In contrast, CESM2's transient climate response of 1.9–2.0 °C is comparable to that of CESM1. The model outputs from these and many other simulations are available to the research community, and they represent CESM2's contributions to the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Software · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.090
Threshold uncertainty score0.180

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0190.008

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.036
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.223 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreSoftware

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations3,190
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Advances in Modeling Earth SystemsSame topicClimate variability and modelsFrench-language works237,207