MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399090976 · doi:10.5194/gmd-17-4401-2024

An improved and extended parameterization of the CO <sub>2</sub> 15 µm cooling in the middle and upper atmosphere (CO2_cool_fort-1.0)

2024· article· en· W4399090976 on OpenAlexaff
M. López‐Puertas, Federico Fabiano, V. I. Fomichev, B. Funke, D. R. Marsh

Bibliographic record

VenueGeoscientific model development · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicAtmospheric Ozone and Climate
Canadian institutionsYork University
FundersAgencia Estatal de Investigación
KeywordsAtmosphere (unit)Environmental scienceAtmospheric sciencesMeteorologyGeologyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. The radiative infrared cooling of CO2 in the middle atmosphere, where it emits under non-local thermodynamic equilibrium (non-LTE) conditions, is a crucial contribution to the energy balance of this region and hence to establishing its thermal structure. The non-LTE computation is too CPU time-consuming to be fully incorporated into climate models, and hence it is parameterized. The most used parameterization of the CO2 15 µm cooling for Earth's middle and upper atmosphere was developed by Fomichev et al. (1998). The valid range of this parameterization with respect to CO2 volume mixing ratios (VMRs) is, however, exceeded by the CO2 of several scenarios considered in the Coupled Climate Model Intercomparison Projects, in particular the abrupt-4×CO2 experiment. Therefore, an extension, as well as an update, of that parameterization is both needed and timely. In this work, we present an update of that parameterization that now covers CO2 volume mixing ratios in the lower atmosphere from ∼0.5 to over 10 times the CO2 pre-industrial value of 284 ppmv (i.e. 150 to 3000 ppmv). Furthermore, it is improved by using a more contemporary CO2 line list and the collisional rates that affect the CO2 cooling rates. Overall, its accuracy is improved when tested for the reference temperature profiles as well as for measured temperature fields covering all expected conditions (latitude and season) of the middle atmosphere. The errors obtained for the reference temperature profiles are below 0.5 K d−1 for the present-day and lower CO2 VMRs. Those errors increase to ∼1–2K d−1 at altitudes between 110 and 120 km for CO2 concentrations of 2 to 3 times the pre-industrial values. For very high CO2 concentrations (4 to 10 times the pre-industrial abundances), those errors are below ∼1 K d−1 for most regions and conditions, except at 107–135 km, where the parameterization overestimates them by ∼1.2 %. These errors are comparable to the deviation of the non-LTE cooling rates with respect to LTE at about 70 km and below, but they are negligible (several times smaller) above that altitude. When applied to a large dataset of global (pole to pole and four seasons) temperature profiles measured by MIPAS (Michelson Interferometer for Passive Atmospheric Spectroscopy) (middle- and upper-atmosphere mode), the errors of the parameterization for the mean cooling rate (bias) are generally below 0.5 K d−1, except between 5×10-3 and 3×10-4 hPa (∼85–98 km), where they can reach biases of 1–2 K d−1. For single-temperature profiles, the cooling rate error (estimated by the root mean square – rms – of a statistically significant sample) is about 1–2 K d−1 below 5×10-3 hPa (∼85 km) and above 2×10-4 hPa (∼102 km). In the intermediate region, however, it is between 2 and 7 K d−1. For elevated stratopause events, the parameterization underestimates the mean cooling rates by 3–7 K d−1 (∼10 %) at altitudes of 85–95 km and the individual cooling rates show a significant rms (5–15 K d−1). Further, we have also tested the parameterization for the temperature obtained by a high-resolution version of the Whole Atmosphere Community Climate Model (WACCM-X), which shows a large temperature variability and wave structure in the middle atmosphere. In this case, the mean (bias) error of the parameterization is very small, smaller than 0.5 K d−1 for most atmospheric layers, reaching only maximum values of 2 K d−1 near 5×10-4 hPa (∼ 96 km). The rms has values of 1–2 K d−1 (∼20 %) below ∼2×10-2 hPa (∼80 km) and values smaller than 4 K d−1 (∼2 %) above 10−4 hPa (∼105 km). In the intermediate region between ∼5×10-3 and ∼2×10-4 hPa (85–102 km), the rms is in the range of 5–12 K d−1. While these values are significant in percentage at ∼5×10-3–5×10-4 hPa, they are very small above ∼5×10-4 hPa (96 km). The routine is very fast, taking (1.5–7.5) ×10-5 s, depending on the extension of the atmospheric profile, the processor and the Fortran compiler.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.801
Threshold uncertainty score0.340

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.197 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeoscientific model developmentSame topicAtmospheric Ozone and ClimateFrench-language works237,207