Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 415

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Simulations of the Atmospheric General Circulation Using a Cloud-Resolving Model as a Superparameterization of Physical Processes

Khairoutdinov, Marat, Randall, David, DeMott, Charlotte·2005·Journal of the Atmospheric Sciences

Abstract

Traditionally, the effects of clouds in GCMs have been represented by semiempirical parameterizations. Recently, a cloud-resolving model (CRM) was embedded into each grid column of a realistic GCM, the NCAR Community Atmosphere Model (CAM), to serve as a superparameterization (SP) of clouds. Results of the standard CAM and the SP-CAM are contrasted, both using T42 resolution (2.8° × 2.8° grid), 26 vertical levels, and up to a 500-day-long simulation. The SP was based on a two-dimensional (2D) CRM with 64 grid columns and 24 levels collocated with the 24 lowest levels of CAM. In terms of the mean state, the SP-CAM produces quite reasonable geographical distributions of precipitation, precipitable water, top-of-the-atmosphere radiative fluxes, cloud radiative forcing, and high-cloud fraction for both December–January–February and June–July–August. The most notable and persistent precipitation bias in the western Pacific, during the Northern Hemisphere summer of all the SP-CAM runs with 2D SP, seems to go away through the use of a small-domain three-dimensional (3D) SP with the same number of grid columns as the 2D SP, but arranged in an 8 × 8 square with identical horizontal resolution of 4 km. Two runs with the 3D SP have been carried out, with and without explicit large-scale momentum transport by convection. Interestingly, the double ITCZ feature seems to go away in the run that includes momentum transport. The SP improves the diurnal variability of nondrizzle precipitation frequency over the standard model by precipitating most frequently during late afternoon hours over the land, as observed, while the standard model maximizes its precipitation frequency around local solar noon. Over the ocean, both models precipitate most frequently in the early morning hours as observed. The SP model also reproduces the observed global distribution of the percentage of days with nondrizzle precipitation rather well. In contrast, the standard model tends to precipitate more frequently, on average by about 20%–30%. The SP model seems to improve the convective intraseasonal variability over the standard model. Preliminary results suggest that the SP produces more realistic variability of such fields as 200-mb wind and OLR, relative to the control, including the often poorly simulated Madden–Julian oscillation (MJO).

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 · 10.1175/jas3453.1

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 415

Metadata

Authors
Khairoutdinov, M., Randall, D., & DeMott, C.
Venue
Journal of the Atmospheric Sciences
Published
2005-07-01
Volume
62
Issue
7
Pages
2136-2154
ISSN
  • 0022-4928 (ISSN-L)
  • 1520-0469
OpenAlex
W2128621633
Cited by
415
References
0
FWCI
8.53
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: Simulations of the Atmospheric General Circulation Using a Cloud-Resolving Model as a Superparameterization of Physical Processes. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1175/jas3453.1
The paper
Khairoutdinov, M., Randall, D., & DeMott, C. (2005). Simulations of the Atmospheric General Circulation Using a Cloud-Resolving Model as a Superparameterization of Physical Processes. Journal of the Atmospheric Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1175/jas3453.1

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.