Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 293

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 78 of the 78 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Large‐eddy simulations over Germany using ICON: a comprehensive evaluation

Open access
Heinze, Rieke, Dipankar, Anurag, Henken, Cintia Carbajal, Moseley, Christopher, Sourdeval, Odran, Trömel, Silke, Xie, Xinxin, Adamidis, Panos, Ament, Felix, Baars, Holger, Barthlott, Christian, Behrendt, Andreas, Blahak, Ulrich, Bley, Sebastian, Brdar, Slavko, Brueck, Matthias, Crewell, Susanne, Deneke, Hartwig, Di Girolamo, Paolo, Evaristo, Raquel, Fischer, Jürgen, Frank, Christopher, Friederichs, Petra, Göcke, Tobias, Gorges, Ksenia, Hande, Luke, Hanke, Moritz, Hansen, Akio, Hege, Hans‐Christian, Hoose, Corinna, Jahns, Thomas, Kalthoff, Norbert, Klocke, Daniel, Kneifel, Stefan, Knippertz, Peter, Kuhn, Alexander, van Laar, Thriza, Macke, Andreas, Maurer, Vera, Mayer, Bernhard, Meyer, Catrin I., Muppa, Shravan K., Neggers, Roeland A. J., Orlandi, Emiliano, Pantillon, Florian, Pospichal, Bernhard, Röber, Niklas, Scheck, Leonhard, Seifert, Axel, Seifert, Patric, Senf, Fabian, Siligam, Pavan, Simmer, Clemens, Steinke, Sandra, Stevens, Bjorn, Wapler, Kathrin, Weniger, Michael, Wulfmeyer, Volker, Zängl, Günther, Zhang, Dan, Quaas, Johannes·2017·Quarterly Journal of the Royal Meteorological Society

Abstract

Large‐eddy simulations (LES) with the new ICOsahedral Non‐hydrostatic atmosphere model (ICON) covering Germany are evaluated for four days in spring 2013 using observational data from various sources. Reference simulations with the established Consortium for Small‐scale Modelling (COSMO) numerical weather prediction model and further standard LES codes are performed and used as a reference. This comprehensive evaluation approach covers multiple parameters and scales, focusing on boundary‐layer variables, clouds and precipitation. The evaluation points to the need to work on parametrizations influencing the surface energy balance, and possibly on ice cloud microphysics. The central purpose for the development and application of ICON in the LES configuration is the use of simulation results to improve the understanding of moist processes, as well as their parametrization in climate models. The evaluation thus aims at building confidence in the model's ability to simulate small‐ to mesoscale variability in turbulence, clouds and precipitation. The results are encouraging: the high‐resolution model matches the observed variability much better at small‐ to mesoscales than the coarser resolved reference model. In its highest grid resolution, the simulated turbulence profiles are realistic and column water vapour matches the observed temporal variability at short time‐scales. Despite being somewhat too large and too frequent, small cumulus clouds are well represented in comparison with satellite data, as is the shape of the cloud size spectrum. Variability of cloud water matches the satellite observations much better in ICON than in the reference model. In this sense, it is concluded that the model is fit for the purpose of using its output for parametrization development, despite the potential to improve further some important aspects of processes that are also parametrized in the high‐resolution model.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/qj.2947

Cites

78 of 78 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 78 references

Cited by

See all 293

Metadata

Authors
Heinze, R., Dipankar, A., Henken, C. C., Moseley, C., Sourdeval, O., Trömel, S., Xie, X., Adamidis, P., Ament, F., Baars, H., Barthlott, C., Behrendt, A., Blahak, U., Bley, S., Brdar, S., Brueck, M., Crewell, S., Deneke, H., Di Girolamo, P., Evaristo, R., Fischer, J., Frank, C., Friederichs, P., Göcke, T., Gorges, K., Hande, L., Hanke, M., Hansen, A., Hege, H., Hoose, C., Jahns, T., Kalthoff, N., Klocke, D., Kneifel, S., Knippertz, P., Kuhn, A., van Laar, T., Macke, A., Maurer, V., Mayer, B., Meyer, C. I., Muppa, S. K., Neggers, R. A. J., Orlandi, E., Pantillon, F., Pospichal, B., Röber, N., Scheck, L., Seifert, A., Seifert, P., Senf, F., Siligam, P., Simmer, C., Steinke, S., Stevens, B., Wapler, K., Weniger, M., Wulfmeyer, V., Zängl, G., Zhang, D., & Quaas, J.
Venue
Quarterly Journal of the Royal Meteorological Society
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2017-01
Volume
143
Issue
702
Pages
69-100
ISSN
  • 0035-9009 (ISSN-L)
  • 1477-870X
OpenAlex
W2546188170
Cited by
293
References
78
FWCI
16.91
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Large‐eddy simulations over Germany using ICON: a comprehensive evaluation. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/qj.2947
The paper
Heinze, R., Dipankar, A., Henken, C. C., Moseley, C., Sourdeval, O., Trömel, S., Xie, X., Adamidis, P., Ament, F., Baars, H., Barthlott, C., Behrendt, A., Blahak, U., Bley, S., Brdar, S., Brueck, M., Crewell, S., Deneke, H., Di Girolamo, P., . . . Quaas, J. (2017). Large‐eddy simulations over Germany using ICON: a comprehensive evaluation. Quarterly Journal of the Royal Meteorological Society. https://doi.org/10.1002/qj.2947

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.