Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 543

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 66 of the 66 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Simulated Climate and Climate Change in the GFDL CM2.5 High-Resolution Coupled Climate Model

Open access
Delworth, Thomas L., Rosati, Anthony, Anderson, Whit, Adcroft, Alistair J., Balaji, V., Benson, Rusty, Dixon, Keith, Griffies, Stephen M., Lee, Hyun-Chul, Pacanowski, Ronald C., Vecchi, Gabriel A., Wittenberg, Andrew T., Zeng, Fanrong, Zhang, Rong·2012·Journal of Climate

Abstract

The authors present results for simulated climate and climate change from a newly developed high-resolution global climate model [Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory Climate Model version 2.5 (GFDL CM2.5)]. The GFDL CM2.5 has an atmospheric resolution of approximately 50 km in the horizontal, with 32 vertical levels. The horizontal resolution in the ocean ranges from 28 km in the tropics to 8 km at high latitudes, with 50 vertical levels. This resolution allows the explicit simulation of some mesoscale eddies in the ocean, particularly at lower latitudes. Analyses are presented based on the output of a 280-yr control simulation; also presented are results based on a 140-yr simulation in which atmospheric CO2 increases at 1% yr−1 until doubling after 70 yr. Results are compared to GFDL CM2.1, which has somewhat similar physics but a coarser resolution. The simulated climate in CM2.5 shows marked improvement over many regions, especially the tropics, including a reduction in the double ITCZ and an improved simulation of ENSO. Regional precipitation features are much improved. The Indian monsoon and Amazonian rainfall are also substantially more realistic in CM2.5. The response of CM2.5 to a doubling of atmospheric CO2 has many features in common with CM2.1, with some notable differences. For example, rainfall changes over the Mediterranean appear to be tightly linked to topography in CM2.5, in contrast to CM2.1 where the response is more spatially homogeneous. In addition, in CM2.5 the near-surface ocean warms substantially in the high latitudes of the Southern Ocean, in contrast to simulations using CM2.1.

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/jcli-d-11-00316.1

Cites

66 of 66 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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

Cites

Show all 66 references

Cited by

See all 543

Metadata

Authors
Delworth, T. L., Rosati, A., Anderson, W., Adcroft, A. J., Balaji, V., Benson, R., Dixon, K., Griffies, S. M., Lee, H.-C., Pacanowski, R. C., Vecchi, G. A., Wittenberg, A. T., Zeng, F., & Zhang, R.
Venue
Journal of Climate
Published
2012-04-10
Volume
25
Issue
8
Pages
2755-2781
ISSN
  • 0894-8755 (ISSN-L)
  • 1520-0442
OpenAlex
W1991467573
Cited by
543
References
66
FWCI
18.53
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

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: Simulated Climate and Climate Change in the GFDL CM2.5 High-Resolution Coupled Climate Model. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1175/jcli-d-11-00316.1
The paper
Delworth, T. L., Rosati, A., Anderson, W., Adcroft, A. J., Balaji, V., Benson, R., Dixon, K., Griffies, S. M., Lee, H.-C., Pacanowski, R. C., Vecchi, G. A., Wittenberg, A. T., Zeng, F., & Zhang, R. (2012). Simulated Climate and Climate Change in the GFDL CM2.5 High-Resolution Coupled Climate Model. Journal of Climate. https://doi.org/10.1175/jcli-d-11-00316.1

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.