MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3185332690 · doi:10.5194/gmd-2021-209

Impact of increased resolution on long-standing biases in HighResMIP-PRIMAVERA climate models

2021· article· en· W3185332690 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Eduardo Moreno‐Chamarro, Louis‐Philippe Caron, Saskia Loosveldt Tomas, Oliver Gutjahr, Marie‐Pierre Moine, Dian Putrasahan, Christopher D. Roberts, Malcolm Roberts, Retish Senan, Laurent Terray, Étienne Tourigny, Pier Luigi Vidale

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicClimate variability and models
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersHorizon 2020 Framework ProgrammeMinisterio de Ciencia e InnovaciónEuropean CommissionHorizon 2020European Space Agency
KeywordsIntertropical Convergence ZoneClimatologyCloud coverPrecipitationEnvironmental scienceUpwellingClimate modelAtmosphere (unit)TroposphereSea surface temperatureAtmospheric sciencesClimate changeGeologyMeteorologyOceanographyGeographyCloud computing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. We examine the impacts of increased resolution on four long-standing biases using five different climate models developed within the PRIMAVERA project. Atmospheric resolution is increased from ~100–200 km to ~25–50 km, and ocean resolution is increased from ~1° (i.e., eddy-parametrized) to ~0.25° (i.e., eddy-present). For one model, ocean resolution is also increased to 1/12° (i.e., eddy-rich). Fully-coupled general circulation models and their atmosphere-only versions are compared with observations and reanalysis of near-surface temperature, precipitation, cloud cover, net cloud radiative effect, and zonal wind over the period 1980–2014. Both the ensemble mean and individual models are analyzed. Increased resolution especially in the atmosphere helps reduce the surface warm bias over the tropical upwelling regions in the coupled models, with further improvements in the cloud cover and precipitation biases particularly over the tropical South Atlantic. Related to this and to the improvement in the precipitation distribution over the western tropical Pacific, the double Intertropical Convergence Zone bias also weakens with resolution. Overall, increased ocean resolution from ~1° to ~0.25° offers limited improvements or even bias degradation in some models, although an eddy-rich ocean resolution seems beneficial for reducing the biases in North Atlantic temperatures and Gulf Stream path. Despite the improvements, however, large biases in precipitation and cloud cover persist over the whole tropics as well as in the upper-troposphere zonal winds at mid-latitudes in coupled and atmosphere-only models at higher resolutions. The Southern Ocean warm bias also worsens or persists in some coupled models. And a new warm bias emerges in the Labrador Sea in all the high-resolution coupled models. The analysis of the PRIMAVERA models therefore suggests that, to reduce biases, i) increased atmosphere resolution up to ~25–50 km alone might not be sufficient and ii) an eddy-rich ocean resolution might be needed. The study thus adds to evidence that further improved model physics and tuning might be necessary in addition to increased resolution to mitigate biases.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.051
Threshold uncertainty score0.102

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.243 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations11
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicClimate variability and models→French-language works237,207→