Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
×
Home
  • Get access
    Check if you have access via personal or institutional login
  • Cited by 58
  • Cited by
    This chapter has been cited by the following publications. This list is generated based on data provided by CrossRef.

    Chou, Sin Chan Lyra, André Mourão, Caroline Dereczynski, Claudine Pilotto, Isabel Gomes, Jorge Bustamante, Josiane Tavares, Priscila Silva, Adan Rodrigues, Daniela Campos, Diego Chagas, Diego Sueiro, Gustavo Siqueira, Gracielle and Marengo, José 2014. Assessment of Climate Change over South America under RCP 4.5 and 8.5 Downscaling Scenarios. American Journal of Climate Change, Vol. 03, Issue. 05, p. 512.

    Chou, Sin Chan Lyra, André Mourão, Caroline Dereczynski, Claudine Pilotto, Isabel Gomes, Jorge Bustamante, Josiane Tavares, Priscila Silva, Adan Rodrigues, Daniela Campos, Diego Chagas, Diego Sueiro, Gustavo Siqueira, Gracielle Nobre, Paulo and Marengo, José 2014. Evaluation of the Eta Simulations Nested in Three Global Climate Models. American Journal of Climate Change, Vol. 03, Issue. 05, p. 438.

    Sriver, Ryan L. Forest, Chris E. and Keller, Klaus 2015. Effects of initial conditions uncertainty on regional climate variability: An analysis using a low-resolution CESM ensemble. Geophysical Research Letters, Vol. 42, Issue. 13, p. 5468.

    Yool, A. Popova, E. E. and Coward, A. C. 2015. Future change in ocean productivity: Is the Arctic the new Atlantic?. Journal of Geophysical Research: Oceans, Vol. 120, Issue. 12, p. 7771.

    Hourdin, Frédéric Găinusă-Bogdan, Alina Braconnot, Pascale Dufresne, Jean-Louis Traore, Aboul-Khadre and Rio, Catherine 2015. Air moisture control on ocean surface temperature, hidden key to the warm bias enigma. Geophysical Research Letters, Vol. 42, Issue. 24, p. 10,885.

    Drews, Annika Greatbatch, Richard J. Ding, Hui Latif, Mojib and Park, Wonsun 2015. The use of a flow field correction technique for alleviating the North Atlantic cold bias with application to the Kiel Climate Model. Ocean Dynamics, Vol. 65, Issue. 8, p. 1079.

    Schurer, Andrew P. Hegerl, Gabriele C. and Obrochta, Stephen P. 2015. Determining the likelihood of pauses and surges in global warming. Geophysical Research Letters, Vol. 42, Issue. 14, p. 5974.

    Ramarao, M. V. S Krishnan, R. Sanjay, J. and Sabin, T. P. 2015. Understanding land surface response to changing South Asian monsoon in a warming climate. Earth System Dynamics, Vol. 6, Issue. 2, p. 569.

    Singh, D. Flanner, M. G. and Perket, J. 2015. The global land shortwave cryosphere radiative effect during the MODIS era. The Cryosphere, Vol. 9, Issue. 6, p. 2057.

    Aït-Mesbah, S. Dufresne, J. L. Cheruy, F. and Hourdin, F. 2015. The role of thermal inertia in the representation of mean and diurnal range of surface temperature in semiarid and arid regions. Geophysical Research Letters, Vol. 42, Issue. 18, p. 7572.

    Radney, James G. and Zangmeister, Christopher D. 2015. Measurement of Gas and Aerosol Phase Absorption Spectra across the Visible and Near-IR Using Supercontinuum Photoacoustic Spectroscopy. Analytical Chemistry, Vol. 87, Issue. 14, p. 7356.

    Dee, Sylvia G. Steiger, Nathan J. Emile-Geay, Julien and Hakim, Gregory J. 2016. On the utility of proxy system models for estimating climate states over the common era. Journal of Advances in Modeling Earth Systems, Vol. 8, Issue. 3, p. 1164.

    Saba, Vincent S. Griffies, Stephen M. Anderson, Whit G. Winton, Michael Alexander, Michael A. Delworth, Thomas L. Hare, Jonathan A. Harrison, Matthew J. Rosati, Anthony Vecchi, Gabriel A. and Zhang, Rong 2016. Enhanced warming of the Northwest Atlantic Ocean under climate change. Journal of Geophysical Research: Oceans, Vol. 121, Issue. 1, p. 118.

    Hakim, Gregory J. Emile-Geay, Julien Steig, Eric J. Noone, David Anderson, David M. Tardif, Robert Steiger, Nathan and Perkins, Walter A. 2016. The last millennium climate reanalysis project: Framework and first results. Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres, Vol. 121, Issue. 12, p. 6745.

    Sekiya, T. Sudo, K. and Nagai, T. 2016. Evolution of stratospheric sulfate aerosol from the 1991 Pinatubo eruption: Roles of aerosol microphysical processes. Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres, Vol. 121, Issue. 6, p. 2911.

    Hurwitz, Margaret M Fleming, Eric L Newman, Paul A Li, Feng and Liang, Qing 2016. Early action on HFCs mitigates future atmospheric change. Environmental Research Letters, Vol. 11, Issue. 11, p. 114019.

    Catto, J. L. 2016. Extratropical cyclone classification and its use in climate studies. Reviews of Geophysics, Vol. 54, Issue. 2, p. 486.

    Janssen, E. Sriver, R. L. Wuebbles, D. J. and Kunkel, K. E. 2016. Seasonal and regional variations in extreme precipitation event frequency using CMIP5. Geophysical Research Letters, Vol. 43, Issue. 10, p. 5385.

    Curry, Charles L. Tencer, Bárbara Whan, Kirien Weaver, Andrew J. Giguère, Michel and Wiebe, Edward 2016. Searching for Added Value in Simulating Climate Extremes with a High-Resolution Regional Climate Model over Western Canada. Atmosphere-Ocean, Vol. 54, Issue. 4, p. 364.

    Rasmussen, D. J. Meinshausen, Malte and Kopp, Robert E. 2016. Probability-Weighted Ensembles of U.S. County-Level Climate Projections for Climate Risk Analysis. Journal of Applied Meteorology and Climatology, Vol. 55, Issue. 10, p. 2301.

    ×
  • Print publication year: 2014
  • Online publication date: June 2014

Chapter 9 - Evaluation of Climate Models

Summary

Executive Summary

Climate models have continued to be developed and improved since the AR4, and many models have been extended into Earth System models by including the representation of biogeochemical cycles important to climate change. These models allow for policy-relevant calculations such as the carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions compatible with a specified climate stabilization target. In addition, the range of climate variables and processes that have been evaluated has greatly expanded, and differences between models and observations are increasingly quantified using ‘performance metrics’. In this chapter, model evaluation covers simulation of the mean climate, of historical climate change, of variability on multiple time scales and of regional modes of variability. This evaluation is based on recent internationally coordinated model experiments, including simulations of historic and paleo climate, specialized experiments designed to provide insight into key climate processes and feedbacks and regional climate downscaling. Figure 9.44 provides an overview of model capabilities as assessed in this chapter, including improvements, or lack thereof, relative to models assessed in the AR4. The chapter concludes with an assessment of recent work connecting model performance to the detection and attribution of climate change as well as to future projections. {9.1.2, 9.8.1, Table 9.1, Figure 9.44}

The ability of climate models to simulate surface temperature has improved in many, though not all, important aspects relative to the generation of models assessed in the AR4.

Recommend this book

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this book to your organisation's collection.

Climate Change 2013 – The Physical Science Basis
  • Online ISBN: 9781107415324
  • Book DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107415324
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to *
×