Global climate model performance over Alaska and Greenland.
Open accessAbstract
The performance of a set of 15 global climate models used in the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project is evaluated for Alaska and Greenland, and compared with the performance over broader pan-Arctic and Northern Hemisphere extratropical domains. Root-mean-square errors relative to the 1958–2000 climatology of the 40-yr ECMWF Re-Analysis (ERA-40) are summed over the seasonal cycles of three variables: surface air temperature, precipitation, and sea level pressure. The specific models that perform best over the larger domains tend to be the ones that perform best over Alaska and Greenland. The rankings of the models are largely unchanged when the bias of each model’s climatological annual mean is removed prior to the error calculation for the individual models. The annual mean biases typically account for about half of the models’ root-mean-square errors. However, the root-mean-square errors of the models are generally much larger than the biases of the composite output, indicating that the systematic errors differ considerably among the models. There is a tendency for the models with smaller errors to simulate a larger greenhouse warming over the Arctic, as well as larger increases of Arctic precipitation and decreases of Arctic sea level pressure, when greenhouse gas concentrations are increased. Because several models have substantially smaller systematic errors than the other models, the differences in greenhouse projections imply that the choice of a subset of models may offer a viable approach to narrowing the uncertainty and obtaining more robust estimates of future climate change in regions such as Alaska, Greenland, and the broader Arctic.
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
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.
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?
Some studies have found more consistent projections when poor models are eliminated.
“In fact, some studies have found more consistent projections when eliminating poor models (e.g., Walsh et al. 2008;Perkins and Pitman 2009;Scherrer 2010).”
From Risks of Model Weighting in Multimodel Climate Projections (2010) · cites this paper as Walsh et al. 2008
The Conclusions say that eliminating models with larger biases might narrow uncertainty in Arctic projections. They describe this as a suggested approach for future assessments, not as a demonstrated finding that projections became more consistent after poor models were eliminated. (LLM, conf=0.88)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
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
Changes in the Velocity Structure of the Greenland Ice Sheet
Rignot, E. J., & Kanagaratnam, P. (2006) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1121381 · Cited by 1,303 · see citing works
The Arctic Amplification Debate
Serreze, M. C., & Francis, J. A. (2006) · Climatic Change · doi:10.1007/s10584-005-9017-y · Cited by 1,179 · see citing works
Using the current seasonal cycle to constrain snow albedo feedback in future climate change
Hall, A., & Qu, X. (2006) · Geophysical Research Letters · doi:10.1029/2005gl025127 · Cited by 469 · see citing works
A tropospheric assessment of the ERA‐40, NCEP, and JRA‐25 global reanalyses in the polar regions
Bromwich, D. H., Fogt, R. L., Hodges, K. I., et al. (2007) · Journal of Geophysical Research Atmospheres · doi:10.1029/2006jd007859 · Cited by 308 · see citing works
Constraining Climate Sensitivity from the Seasonal Cycle in Surface Temperature
Knutti, R., Meehl, G. A., Allen, M. R., & Stainforth, D. A. (2006) · Journal of Climate · doi:10.1175/jcli3865.1 · Cited by 183 · see citing works
Future climate of the north Pacific Ocean
Overland, J. E., & Wang, M. (2007) · Eos · doi:10.1029/2007eo160003 · Cited by 110 · see citing works
The Greenland Ice Sheet and Global Sea-Level Rise
Dowdeswell, J. A. (2006) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1124190 · Cited by 101 · see citing works
Wang, M., Overland, J. E., Катцов, В. М., et al. (2007) · Journal of Climate · doi:10.1175/jcli4043.1 · Cited by 84 · see citing works
Tsushima, Y., Abe‐Ouchi, A., & Manabe, S. (2005) · Climate Dynamics · doi:10.1007/s00382-005-0002-y · Cited by 35 · see citing works
Timing of global warming in IPCC AR4 AOGCM simulations
Катцов, В. М., & Sporyshev, P. V. (2006) · Geophysical Research Letters · doi:10.1029/2006gl027476 · Cited by 11 · see citing works
The Physical Basis for Climate Change
Leddin, D. J. (2023) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-39466-9_1 · Cited by 6 · see citing works
McHugh, M. (2004) · doi:10.1175/1520-0442(2004)017
Carlin (2002) · doi:10.1175/1520-0442(2002)015
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 1
- Nakicenovic, N., and R. Swart, Eds., 2000: Emissions Scenarios. Cambridge University Press, 599 pp.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Risks of Model Weighting in Multimodel Climate Projections
Weigel, A. P., Knutti, R., Liniger, M. A., & Appenzeller, C. (2010) · Journal of Climate · doi:10.1175/2010jcli3594.1 · Cited by 386 · see citing works
- Authors
- Walsh, J. E., Chapman, W. L., Romanovsky, V., Christensen, J. H., & Stendel, M.
- Affiliations
- University of Alaska Fairbanks (US)
- University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign (US)
- Danish Meteorological Institute (DK)
- Corresponding author
- Walsh, John E.
- Venue
- Journal of Climate
- Publisher
- American Meteorological Society
- Published
- 2008-12-01
- Volume
- 21
- Issue
- 23
- Pages
- 6156-6174
- ISSN
- 0894-8755 (ISSN-L)
- 1520-0442
- OpenAlex
- W2131762757
- Cited by
- 208
- References
- 14
- Citations by year
- 2026: 7 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 13 · 2017: 13 · 2016: 16 · 2015: 14 · 2014: 20 · 2013: 20 · 2012: 27
- FWCI
- 9.86
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- Journal of Climate (publishedVersion)
- Research at the University of Copenhagen (University of Copenhagen) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- National Science Foundation (0520112, 0612533)
- U.S. Department of Energy
- University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
- Office of Science
- Office of Polar Programs
- Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Climate variability and models
- Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Atmospheric Science › Meteorological Phenomena and Simulations
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Climate Change and Environmental Impact
- Keywords
- global climate model evaluation, CMIP, Alaska, Greenland, Arctic climate, systematic model errors, model bias, surface air temperature, precipitation, sea level pressure, global warming, Arctic precipitation, climate change projections, model selection, ERA-40 reanalysis
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