Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 271

The DOI matches its OpenAlex record.

MEETING SUMMARIES

Gerald A. Meehl, Curt Covey, B. J. McAvaney, Mojib Latif, Ronald J. Stouffer·2005·Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society

Abstract

The Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP) involves study and intercomparison of multimodel simulations of present and future climate. The simulations of the future use idealized forcing in which CO, increase is compounded 1% yr(-1) until it doubles (near year 70) with global coupled models that contain, typically, components representing atmosphere, ocean, sea ice, and land surface. Results from CMIP diagnostic sub-projects were presented at the Second CMIP Workshop held at the Max Planck Institute for Meteorology in Hamburg, Germany, in September 2003. Significant progress in diagnosing and understanding results from global coupled models has been made since the time of the First CMIP Workshop in Melbourne, Australia, in 1998. For example, the issue of flux adjustment is slowly fading as more and more models obtain stable multicentury surface climates without them. El Nino variability, usually about half the observed amplitude in the previous generation of coupled models, is now more accurately simulated in the present generation of global coupled models, though there are still biases in simulating the patterns of maximum variability. Typical resolutions of atmospheric component models contained in coupled models are now usually around 2.5degrees latitude-longitude, with the ocean components often having about twice the atmospheric model resolution, with even higher resolution in the equatorial Tropics. Some new-generation coupled models have atmospheric resolutions of around 1.5degrees latitude - longitude. Modeling groups now routinely run the CMIP control and 1% CO2 simulations in addition to twentieth- and twenty-first-century climate simulations with a variety of forcings e.g., volcanoes, solar variability, anthropogenic sulfate aerosols, ozone, and greenhouse gases, with the anthropogenic forcings for future climate as well. However, persistent systematic errors noted in previous generations of global coupled models are still present in the current generation (e.g., overextensive equatorial Pacific cold tongue, double ITCZ). This points to the next challenge for the global coupled climate modeling community. Planning and commencement of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Fourth Assessment Report (AR4) has prompted rapid coupled model development, which is leading to an expanded CMIP-like activity to collect and analyze results for the control, 1% CO2, and twentieth-, twenty-first, and twenty-second-century simulations performed for the AR4. The international climate community is encouraged to become involved in this analysis effort.

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

OpenAlex · 10.1175/bams-86-1-89

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.

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

Cited by

See all 271

Metadata

Authors
Meehl, G. A., Covey, C., McAvaney, B. J., Latif, M., & Stouffer, R. J.
Venue
Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society
Publisher
American Meteorological Society
Published
2005-01-01
Volume
86
Issue
1
Pages
89-96
ISSN
0003-0007 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2120903086
Cited by
271
References
0
FWCI
10.97
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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: MEETING SUMMARIES. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1175/bams-86-1-89
The paper
Meehl, G. A., Covey, C., McAvaney, B. J., Latif, M., & Stouffer, R. J. (2005). MEETING SUMMARIES. Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society. https://doi.org/10.1175/bams-86-1-89

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.