Cited by 1,657Climate variability and modelsClimate Change and Environmental ImpactGeology and Paleoclimatology Research

Quantifying uncertainties in global and regional temperature change using an ensemble of observational estimates: The HadCRUT4 data set

Open access
Morice, Colin P., Kennedy, John J., Rayner, Nick A., Jones, Phil D.·2012·Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres

Abstract

Recent developments in observational near‐surface air temperature and sea‐surface temperature analyses are combined to produce HadCRUT4, a new data set of global and regional temperature evolution from 1850 to the present. This includes the addition of newly digitized measurement data, both over land and sea, new sea‐surface temperature bias adjustments and a more comprehensive error model for describing uncertainties in sea‐surface temperature measurements. An ensemble approach has been adopted to better describe complex temporal and spatial interdependencies of measurement and bias uncertainties and to allow these correlated uncertainties to be taken into account in studies that are based upon HadCRUT4. Climate diagnostics computed from the gridded data set broadly agree with those of other global near‐surface temperature analyses. Fitted linear trends in temperature anomalies are approximately 0.07°C/decade from 1901 to 2010 and 0.17°C/decade from 1979 to 2010 globally. Northern/southern hemispheric trends are 0.08/0.07°C/decade over 1901 to 2010 and 0.24/0.10°C/decade over 1979 to 2010. Linear trends in other prominent near‐surface temperature analyses agree well with the range of trends computed from the HadCRUT4 ensemble members.

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 · 10.1029/2011jd017187

Cites

50 of 50 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Like Morice et al. (2012), we produce an ensemble of the GHCNm v4 dataset as a way to quantify uncertainty that arises from correlated error structures in the data.

    “Further, like Morice et al. (2012), we produce an ensemble of the GHCNm v4 dataset as a way to quantify uncertainty that arises from correlated error structures in the data.”

    From The Global Historical Climatology Network Monthly Temperature Dataset, Version 4 (2018) · cites this paper as Morice et al. 2012

  • Our approach to building an uncertainty budget for GHCNm v4 temperatures broadly follows methods described in Brohan et al. (2006) and Morice et al. (2012) that have been applied to the CRUTEM dataset.

    “Our approach to building an uncertainty budget for GHCNm v4 temperatures broadly follows methods described in Brohan et al. (2006) and Morice et al. (2012) that have been applied to the CRUTEM dataset (Jones et al. 2012).”

    From The Global Historical Climatology Network Monthly Temperature Dataset, Version 4 (2018) · cites this paper as Morice et al. 2012

  • The method relies on a comparison of gridbox-scale trends in observational datasets for temperature and precipitation with those produced in climate model runs from CMIP6.

    “The method relies on a comparison of gridbox-scale trends in observational datasets for temperature (HadCRUT4 version 4.6 54 ) and precipitation (GPCC v2018, obtainable from https://psl.noaa.gov/data/gridded/data.gpcc.html),with those produced in climate model runs from CMIP6 55 .”

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Kennedy, J. J., P. W. Thorne, T. C. Peterson, R. Ruedy, P. A. Stott, D. E. Parker, S. A. Good, H. Titchner, and K. Willett (2010), How do we know the world has warmed?, Bull. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 91(7), S26-S27.
  2. Vincent, L. A., X. Zhang, B. R. Bonsal, and W. D. Hogg (2002), Homog- enization of daily temperatures over Canada, J. Clim., 15, 1322-1334, doi:10.1175/1520-0442(2002)015<1322:HODTOC>2.0.CO;2. · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Morice, C. P., Kennedy, J. J., Rayner, N. A., & Jones, P. D.
Affiliations
Met Office (GB)
Venue
Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres
Published
2012-04-17
Volume
117
Issue
D8
ISSN
0148-0227 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2031027346
Cited by
1,657
References
50
Citations by year
2026: 21 · 2025: 38 · 2024: 59 · 2023: 96 · 2022: 111 · 2021: 201 · 2020: 205 · 2019: 154 · 2018: 170 · 2017: 153 · 2016: 109 · 2015: 130 · 2014: 104 · 2013: 84 · 2012: 20
FWCI
89.55
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Geophysical Research Atmospheres (publishedVersion)
  • UEA Digital Repository (University of East Anglia) (acceptedVersion)
Funders
U.S. Department of Energy (DESC0005689)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Climate variability and models
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Climate Change and Environmental Impact
  • Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Atmospheric Science › Geology and Paleoclimatology Research
Keywords
HadCRUT4, global temperature change, regional temperature change, surface air temperature, sea surface temperature, temperature uncertainty, error model, temperature trends, climate diagnostics

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