Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 188

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Tropical Cyclone Climatology in a 10-km Global Atmospheric GCM: Toward Weather-Resolving Climate Modeling

Open access
Manganello, Julia V., Hodges, Kevin I., Kinter, James L., Cash, Benjamin A., Marx, Lawrence, Jung, Thomas, Achuthavarier, Deepthi, Adams, Jennifer M., Altshuler, Eric L., Huang, Bohua, Jin, Emilia K., Stan, Cristiana, Towers, Peter, Wedi, Nils·2012·Journal of Climate

Abstract

Northern Hemisphere tropical cyclone (TC) activity is investigated in multiyear global climate simulations with the ECMWF Integrated Forecast System (IFS) at 10-km resolution forced by the observed records of sea surface temperature and sea ice. The results are compared to analogous simulations with the 16-, 39-, and 125-km versions of the model as well as observations. In the North Atlantic, mean TC frequency in the 10-km model is comparable to the observed frequency, whereas it is too low in the other versions. While spatial distributions of the genesis and track densities improve systematically with increasing resolution, the 10-km model displays qualitatively more realistic simulation of the track density in the western subtropical North Atlantic. In the North Pacific, the TC count tends to be too high in the west and too low in the east for all resolutions. These model errors appear to be associated with the errors in the large-scale environmental conditions that are fairly similar in this region for all model versions. The largest benefits of the 10-km simulation are the dramatically more accurate representation of the TC intensity distribution and the structure of the most intense storms. The model can generate a supertyphoon with a maximum surface wind speed of 68.4 m s−1. The life cycle of an intense TC comprises intensity fluctuations that occur in apparent connection with the variations of the eyewall/rainband structure. These findings suggest that a hydrostatic model with cumulus parameterization and of high enough resolution could be efficiently used to simulate the TC intensity response (and the associated structural changes) to future climate change.

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-11-00346.1

Cites

1 of 1 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

Cited by

See all 188

Metadata

Authors
Manganello, J. V., Hodges, K. I., Kinter, J. L., Cash, B. A., Marx, L., Jung, T., Achuthavarier, D., Adams, J. M., Altshuler, E. L., Huang, B., Jin, E. K., Stan, C., Towers, P., & Wedi, N.
Venue
Journal of Climate
Published
2012-06
Volume
25
Issue
11
Pages
3867-3893
ISSN
  • 0894-8755 (ISSN-L)
  • 1520-0442
OpenAlex
W1994937826
Cited by
188
References
1
FWCI
9.58
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: Tropical Cyclone Climatology in a 10-km Global Atmospheric GCM: Toward Weather-Resolving Climate Modeling. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1175/jcli-d-11-00346.1
The paper
Manganello, J. V., Hodges, K. I., Kinter, J. L., Cash, B. A., Marx, L., Jung, T., Achuthavarier, D., Adams, J. M., Altshuler, E. L., Huang, B., Jin, E. K., Stan, C., Towers, P., & Wedi, N. (2012). Tropical Cyclone Climatology in a 10-km Global Atmospheric GCM: Toward Weather-Resolving Climate Modeling. Journal of Climate. https://doi.org/10.1175/jcli-d-11-00346.1

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.