Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 4 of 4 items for

  • Author or Editor: Florian Rauser x
  • All content x
Clear All Modify Search
Florian Rauser, Peter Gleckler, and Jochem Marotzke

Abstract

We discuss the current code of practice in the climate sciences to routinely create climate model ensembles as ensembles of opportunity from the newest phase of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP). We give a two-step argument to rethink this process. First, the differences between generations of ensembles corresponding to different CMIP phases in key climate quantities are not large enough to warrant an automatic separation into generational ensembles for CMIP3 and CMIP5. Second, we suggest that climate model ensembles cannot continue to be mere ensembles of opportunity but should always be based on a transparent scientific decision process. If ensembles can be constrained by observation, then they should be constructed as target ensembles that are specifically tailored to a physical question. If model ensembles cannot be constrained by observation, then they should be constructed as cross-generational ensembles, including all available model data to enhance structural model diversity and to better sample the underlying uncertainties. To facilitate this, CMIP should guide the necessarily ongoing process of updating experimental protocols for the evaluation and documentation of coupled models. With an emphasis on easy access to model data and facilitating the filtering of climate model data across all CMIP generations and experiments, our community could return to the underlying idea of using model data ensembles to improve uncertainty quantification, evaluation, and cross-institutional exchange.

Full access
Florian Rauser, Andreas Schmidt, Sebastian Sonntag, and Diana Süsser
Full access
Frédéric Hourdin, Thorsten Mauritsen, Andrew Gettelman, Jean-Christophe Golaz, Venkatramani Balaji, Qingyun Duan, Doris Folini, Duoying Ji, Daniel Klocke, Yun Qian, Florian Rauser, Catherine Rio, Lorenzo Tomassini, Masahiro Watanabe, and Daniel Williamson

Abstract

The process of parameter estimation targeting a chosen set of observations is an essential aspect of numerical modeling. This process is usually named tuning in the climate modeling community. In climate models, the variety and complexity of physical processes involved, and their interplay through a wide range of spatial and temporal scales, must be summarized in a series of approximate submodels. Most submodels depend on uncertain parameters. Tuning consists of adjusting the values of these parameters to bring the solution as a whole into line with aspects of the observed climate. Tuning is an essential aspect of climate modeling with its own scientific issues, which is probably not advertised enough outside the community of model developers. Optimization of climate models raises important questions about whether tuning methods a priori constrain the model results in unintended ways that would affect our confidence in climate projections. Here, we present the definition and rationale behind model tuning, review specific methodological aspects, and survey the diversity of tuning approaches used in current climate models. We also discuss the challenges and opportunities in applying so-called objective methods in climate model tuning. We discuss how tuning methodologies may affect fundamental results of climate models, such as climate sensitivity. The article concludes with a series of recommendations to make the process of climate model tuning more transparent.

Full access
Florian Rauser, Mohammad Alqadi, Steve Arowolo, Noël Baker, Joel Bedard, Erik Behrens, Nilay Dogulu, Lucas Gatti Domingues, Ariane Frassoni, Julia Keller, Sarah Kirkpatrick, Gaby Langendijk, Masoumeh Mirsafa, Salauddin Mohammad, Ann Kristin Naumann, Marisol Osman, Kevin Reed, Marion Rothmüller, Vera Schemann, Awnesh Singh, Sebastian Sonntag, Fiona Tummon, Dike Victor, Marcelino Q. Villafuerte, Jakub P. Walawender, and Modathir Zaroug

Abstract

The exigencies of the global community toward Earth system science will increase in the future as the human population, economies, and the human footprint on the planet continue to grow. This growth, combined with intensifying urbanization, will inevitably exert increasing pressure on all ecosystem services. A unified interdisciplinary approach to Earth system science is required that can address this challenge, integrate technical demands and long-term visions, and reconcile user demands with scientific feasibility. Together with the research arms of the World Meteorological Organization, the Young Earth System Scientists community has gathered early-career scientists from around the world to initiate a discussion about frontiers of Earth system science. To provide optimal information for society, Earth system science has to provide a comprehensive understanding of the physical processes that drive the Earth system and anthropogenic influences. This understanding will be reflected in seamless prediction systems for environmental processes that are robust and instructive to local users on all scales. Such prediction systems require improved physical process understanding, more high-resolution global observations, and advanced modeling capability, as well as high-performance computing on unprecedented scales. At the same time, the robustness and usability of such prediction systems also depend on deepening our understanding of the entire Earth system and improved communication between end users and researchers. Earth system science is the fundamental baseline for understanding the Earth’s capacity to accommodate humanity, and it provides a means to have a rational discussion about the consequences and limits of anthropogenic influence on Earth. Without its progress, truly sustainable development will be impossible.

Full access