The DOI matches its Crossref record; 285 of the 285 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Confronting the Challenge of Modeling Cloud and Precipitation Microphysics
Open accessAbstract
In the atmosphere, microphysics refers to the microscale processes that affect cloud and precipitation particles and is a key linkage among the various components of Earth's atmospheric water and energy cycles. The representation of microphysical processes in models continues to pose a major challenge leading to uncertainty in numerical weather forecasts and climate simulations. In this paper, the problem of treating microphysics in models is divided into two parts: (i) how to represent the population of cloud and precipitation particles, given the impossibility of simulating all particles individually within a cloud, and (ii) uncertainties in the microphysical process rates owing to fundamental gaps in knowledge of cloud physics. The recently developed Lagrangian particle‐based method is advocated as a way to address several conceptual and practical challenges of representing particle populations using traditional bulk and bin microphysics parameterization schemes. For addressing critical gaps in cloud physics knowledge, sustained investment for observational advances from laboratory experiments, new probe development, and next‐generation instruments in space is needed. Greater emphasis on laboratory work, which has apparently declined over the past several decades relative to other areas of cloud physics research, is argued to be an essential ingredient for improving process‐level understanding. More systematic use of natural cloud and precipitation observations to constrain microphysics schemes is also advocated. Because it is generally difficult to quantify individual microphysical process rates from these observations directly, this presents an inverse problem that can be viewed from the standpoint of Bayesian statistics. Following this idea, a probabilistic framework is proposed that combines elements from statistical and physical modeling. Besides providing rigorous constraint of schemes, there is an added benefit of quantifying uncertainty systematically. Finally, a broader hierarchical approach is proposed to accelerate improvements in microphysics schemes, leveraging the advances described in this paper related to process modeling (using Lagrangian particle‐based schemes), laboratory experimentation, cloud and precipitation observations, and statistical methods.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Multivariate Adaptive Regression Splines
Friedman, J. H. (1991) · The Annals of Statistics · doi:10.1214/aos/1176347963 · Cited by 8,000
Probability Theory: The Logic of Science
Jaynes, E. T. (2003) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511790423 · Cited by 4,045
THE DISTRIBUTION OF RAINDROPS WITH SIZE
Marshall, J. S., & Palmer, W. M. K. (1948) · Journal of Meteorology · doi:10.1175/1520-0469(1948)005<0165:tdorws>2.0.co;2 · Cited by 3,670
Bulk Parameterization of the Snow Field in a Cloud Model
Lin, Y.-L., Farley, R. D., & Orville, H. D. (1983) · Journal of Climate and Applied Meteorology · doi:10.1175/1520-0450(1983)022<1065:bpotsf>2.0.co;2 · Cited by 3,481
Microphysics of Clouds and Precipitation
Pruppacher, H. R., Klett, J. D., & Wang, P. K. (1998) · Aerosol Science and Technology · doi:10.1080/02786829808965531 · Cited by 2,827
The WRF Single-Moment 6-Class Microphysics Scheme (WSM6)
Hong, S., & Lim, J. J. (2006) · Asia-Pacific Journal of Atmospheric Sciences · Cited by 2,730
The Logic of Scientific Discovery
Popper, K. R., & Weiss, G. (1959) · Physics Today · doi:10.1063/1.3060577 · Cited by 2,717
Hong, S.-Y., Dudhia, J., & Chen, S.-H. (2004) · Monthly Weather Review · doi:10.1175/1520-0493(2004)132<0103:aratim>2.0.co;2 · Cited by 2,581
Theory-Guided Data Science: A New Paradigm for Scientific Discovery from Data
Karpatne, A., Atluri, G., Faghmous, J. H., Steinbach, M., Banerjee, A., Ganguly, A., Shekhar, S., Samatova, N., & Kumar, V. (2017) · IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering · doi:10.1109/tkde.2017.2720168 · Cited by 1,752
Cited by
Henneberger, J., Ramelli, F., Spirig, R., Omanovic, N., Miller, A. J., Fuchs, C., Zhang, H., Bühl, J., Hervo, M., Kanji, Z. A., et al. (2023) · Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society · doi:10.1175/bams-d-22-0178.1 · Cited by 47
Repurposing weather modification for cloud research showcased by ice crystal growth
Ramelli, F., Henneberger, J., Fuchs, C., Miller, A. J., Omanovic, N., Spirig, R., Zhang, H., David, R. O., Ohneiser, K., Seifert, P., et al. (2024) · PNAS Nexus · doi:10.1093/pnasnexus/pgae402 · Cited by 12
Metadata
- Authors
- Morrison, H., van Lier‐Walqui, M., Fridlind, A. M., Grabowski, W. W., Harrington, J. Y., Hoose, C., Korolev, A., Kumjian, M. R., Milbrandt, J. A., Pawlowska, H., Posselt, D. J., Prat, O. P., Reimel, K. J., Shima, S., van Diedenhoven, B., & Xue, L.
- Venue
- Journal of Advances in Modeling Earth Systems
- Publisher
- American Geophysical Union (AGU)
- Published
- 2020-07-31
- Volume
- 12
- Issue
- 8
- Pages
- e2019MS001689-e2019MS001689
- ISSN
- 1942-2466 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W3023073569
- Cited by
- 614
- References
- 285
- FWCI
- 28.19
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
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: Confronting the Challenge of Modeling Cloud and Precipitation Microphysics. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1029/2019ms001689
- The paper
- Morrison, H., van Lier‐Walqui, M., Fridlind, A. M., Grabowski, W. W., Harrington, J. Y., Hoose, C., Korolev, A., Kumjian, M. R., Milbrandt, J. A., Pawlowska, H., Posselt, D. J., Prat, O. P., Reimel, K. J., Shima, S., van Diedenhoven, B., & Xue, L. (2020). Confronting the Challenge of Modeling Cloud and Precipitation Microphysics. Journal of Advances in Modeling Earth Systems. https://doi.org/10.1029/2019ms001689
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.