Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 232

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Assessment of Twentieth-Century Regional Surface Temperature Trends Using the GFDL CM2 Coupled Models

Open access
Knutson, T. R., Delworth, T. L., Dixon, K. W., Held, I. M., Lu, J., Ramaswamy, V., Schwarzkopf, M. D., Stenchikov, G., Stouffer, R. J.·2006·Journal of Climate

Abstract

Historical climate simulations of the period 1861–2000 using two new Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory (GFDL) global climate models (CM2.0 and CM2.1) are compared with observed surface temperatures. All-forcing runs include the effects of changes in well-mixed greenhouse gases, ozone, sulfates, black and organic carbon, volcanic aerosols, solar flux, and land cover. Indirect effects of tropospheric aerosols on clouds and precipitation processes are not included. Ensembles of size 3 (CM2.0) and 5 (CM2.1) with all forcings are analyzed, along with smaller ensembles of natural-only and anthropogenic-only forcing, and multicentury control runs with no external forcing. Observed warming trends on the global scale and in many regions are simulated more realistically in the all-forcing and anthropogenic-only forcing runs than in experiments using natural-only forcing or no external forcing. In the all-forcing and anthropogenic-only forcing runs, the model shows some tendency for too much twentieth-century warming in lower latitudes and too little warming in higher latitudes. Differences in Arctic Oscillation behavior between models and observations contribute substantially to an underprediction of the observed warming over northern Asia. In the all-forcing and natural-only forcing runs, a temporary global cooling in the models during the 1880s not evident in the observed temperature records is volcanically forced. El Niño interactions complicate comparisons of observed and simulated temperature records for the El Chichón and Mt. Pinatubo eruptions during the early 1980s and early 1990s. The simulations support previous findings that twentieth-century global warming has resulted from a combination of natural and anthropogenic forcing, with anthropogenic forcing being the dominant cause of the pronounced late-twentieth-century warming. The regional results provide evidence for an emergent anthropogenic warming signal over many, if not most, regions of the globe. The warming signal has emerged rather monotonically in the Indian Ocean/western Pacific warm pool during the past half-century. The tropical and subtropical North Atlantic and the tropical eastern Pacific are examples of regions where the anthropogenic warming signal now appears to be emerging from a background of more substantial multidecadal variability.

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/jcli3709.1

Cites

4 of 4 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

Cited by

See all 232

Metadata

Authors
Knutson, T. R., Delworth, T. L., Dixon, K. W., Held, I. M., Lu, J., Ramaswamy, V., Schwarzkopf, M. D., Stenchikov, G., & Stouffer, R. J.
Venue
Journal of Climate
Published
2006-05-01
Volume
19
Issue
9
Pages
1624-1651
ISSN
  • 0894-8755 (ISSN-L)
  • 1520-0442
OpenAlex
W1992598328
Cited by
232
References
4
FWCI
24.04
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

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.