Constraining Clouds and Convective Parameterizations in a Climate Model Using Paleoclimate Data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Cloud and convective parameterizations strongly influence uncertainties in equilibrium climate sensitivity. We provide a proof‐of‐concept study to constrain these parameterizations in a perturbed parameter ensemble of the atmosphere‐only version of the Goddard Institute for Space Studies Model E2.1 simulations by evaluating model biases in the present‐day runs using multiple satellite climatologies and by comparing simulated δ 18 O of precipitation (δ 18 O p ), known to be sensitive to parameterization schemes, with a global database of speleothem δ 18 O records covering the Last Glacial Maximum (LGM), mid‐Holocene (MH) and pre‐industrial (PI) periods. Relative to modern interannual variability, paleoclimate simulations show greater sensitivity to parameter changes, allowing for an evaluation of model uncertainties over a broader range of climate forcing and the identification of parts of the world that are parameter sensitive. Certain simulations reproduced absolute δ 18 O p values across all time periods, along with LGM and MH δ 18 O p anomalies relative to the PI, better than the default parameterization. No single set of parameterizations worked well in all climate states, likely due to the non‐stationarity of cloud feedbacks under varying boundary conditions. Future work that involves varying multiple parameter sets simultaneously with coupled ocean feedbacks will likely provide improved constraints on cloud and convective parameterizations.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".