Cited by 174Meteorological Phenomena and SimulationsClimate variability and modelsAtmospheric aerosols and clouds

The Frequency of Extreme Rain Events in Satellite Rain-Rate Estimates and an Atmospheric General Circulation Model

Open access
Wilcox, Eric M., Donner, Leo J.·2007·Journal of Climate

Abstract

The frequency distributions of surface rain rate are evaluated in the Tropical Rainfall Measuring Mission (TRMM) and Special Sensor Microwave/Imager (SSM/I) satellite observations and the NOAA/GFDL global atmosphere model version 2 (AM2). Instantaneous satellite rain-rate observations averaged over the 2.5° latitude × 2° longitude model grid are shown to be representative of the half-hour rain rate from single time steps simulated by the model. Rain-rate events exceeding 10 mm h−1 are observed by satellites in most regions, with 1 mm h−1 events occurring more than two orders of magnitude more frequently than 10 mm h−1 events. A model simulation using the relaxed Arakawa–Schubert (RAS) formulation of cumulus convection exhibits a strong bias toward many more light rain events compared to the observations and far too few heavy rain events. A simulation using an alternative convection scheme, which includes an explicit representation of mesoscale circulations and an alternative formulation of the closure, exhibits, among other differences, an order of magnitude more tropical rain events above the 5 mm h−1 rate compared to the RAS simulation. This simulation demonstrates that global atmospheric models can be made to produce heavy rain events, in some cases even exceeding the observed frequency of such events. Additional simulations reveal that the frequency distribution of the surface rain rate in the GCM is shaped by a variety of components within the convection parameterization, including the closure, convective triggers, the spectrum of convective and mesoscale clouds, and other parameters whose physical basis is currently only understood to a limited extent. Furthermore, these components interact nonlinearly such that the sensitivity of the rain-rate distribution to the formulation of one component may depend on the formulation of the others. Two simulations using different convection parameterizations are performed using perturbed sea surface temperatures as a surrogate for greenhouse gas–forced climate warming. Changes in the frequency of rain events greater than 2 mm h−1 associated with changing the convection scheme in the model are greater than the changes in the frequency of heavy rain events associated with a 2-K warming using either model. Thus, uncertainty persists with respect to simulating intensity distributions for precipitation and projecting their future changes. Improving the representation of the frequency distribution of rain rates will rely on refinements in the formulation of cumulus closure and the other components of convection schemes, and greater certainty in predictions of future changes in both total rainfall and in rain-rate distributions will require additional refinements in those parameterizations that determine the cloud and water vapor feedbacks.

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/jcli3987.1

Cites

32 of 32 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Important limitations in the ability of current models to simulate precipitation extremes have been recognized and are related in part to the use of parameterized convection.

    “Important limitations in the ability of current models to simulate precipitation extremes have also been recognized and are related in part to the use of parameterized convection [38, 43, 58, 89, 93].”

    From Precipitation Extremes Under Climate Change (2015) · cites this paper as [93]

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Battan, L., 1973: Radar Observations of the Atmosphere. Univer- sity of Chicago Press, 324 pp.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Wilcox, E. M., & Donner, L. J.
Affiliations
  • Princeton University (US)
  • NOAA Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory (US)
Venue
Journal of Climate
Published
2007-01-01
Volume
20
Issue
1
Pages
53-69
ISSN
  • 0894-8755 (ISSN-L)
  • 1520-0442
OpenAlex
W2096115864
Cited by
174
References
32
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 20 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 10 · 2014: 15 · 2013: 9 · 2012: 11
FWCI
4.00
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
Journal of Climate (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • University Corporation for Atmospheric Research
  • National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
  • Marshall Space Flight Center
  • Goddard Space Flight Center
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Atmospheric Science › Meteorological Phenomena and Simulations
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Climate variability and models
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Atmospheric aerosols and clouds
Keywords
heavy rainfall, convection parameterization, mesoscale circulation, TRMM, SSM/I, global warming, greenhouse gas forcing, cloud feedback

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