The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A New Look at Stratospheric Sudden Warmings. Part I: Climatology and Modeling Benchmarks
Open accessAbstract
Stratospheric sudden warmings are the clearest and strongest manifestation of dynamical coupling in the stratosphere–troposphere system. While many sudden warmings have been individually documented in the literature, this study aims at constructing a comprehensive climatology: all major midwinter warming events are identified and classified, in both the NCEP–NCAR and 40-yr ECMWF Re-Analysis (ERA-40) datasets. To accomplish this a new, objective identification algorithm is developed. This algorithm identifies sudden warmings based on the zonal mean zonal wind at 60°N and 10 hPa, and classifies them into events that do and do not split the stratospheric polar vortex. Major midwinter stratospheric sudden warmings are found to occur with a frequency of approximately six events per decade, and 46% of warming events lead to a splitting of the stratospheric polar vortex. The dynamics of vortex splitting events is contrasted to that of events where the vortex is merely displaced off the pole. In the stratosphere, the two types of events are found to be dynamically distinct: vortex splitting events occur after a clear preconditioning of the polar vortex, and their influence on middle-stratospheric temperatures lasts for up to 20 days longer than vortex displacement events. In contrast, the influence of sudden warmings on the tropospheric state is found to be largely insensitive to the event type. Finally, a table of dynamical benchmarks for major stratospheric sudden warming events is compiled. These benchmarks are used in a companion study to evaluate current numerical model simulations of the stratosphere.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
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.
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
How well do we understand the dynamics of stratospheric warmings?
McIntyre, M. E. (1982) · Journal of the Meteorological Society of Japan Ser II · doi:10.2151/jmsj1965.60.1_37 · Cited by 317
Cited by
The Whole Atmosphere Community Climate Model Version 6 (WACCM6)
Gettelman, A., Mills, M. J., Kinnison, D. E., Garcia, R. R., Smith, A. K., Marsh, D. R., Tilmes, S., Vitt, F., Bardeen, C. G., McInerny, J., et al. (2019) · Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres · doi:10.1029/2019jd030943 · Cited by 786
Self-citationThe ERA5 global reanalysis: Preliminary extension to 1950
Bell, B., Hersbach, H., Simmons, A., Berrisford, P., Dahlgren, P., Horányi, A., Muñoz‐Sabater, J., Nicolas, J., Radu, R., Schepers, D., et al. (2021) · Quarterly Journal of the Royal Meteorological Society · doi:10.1002/qj.4174 · Cited by 689
On the lack of stratospheric dynamical variability in low‐top versions of the CMIP5 models
Charlton‐Perez, A. J., Baldwin, M. P., Birner, T., Black, R. X., Butler, A. H., Calvo, N., Davis, N. A., Gerber, E. P., Gillett, N., Hardiman, S., et al. (2013) · Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres · doi:10.1002/jgrd.50125 · Cited by 331
Self-citationHigh‐latitude influence of the quasi‐biennial oscillation
Anstey, J. A., & Shepherd, T. G. (2014) · Quarterly Journal of the Royal Meteorological Society · doi:10.1002/qj.2132 · Cited by 278
Thermospheric mass density: A review
Emmert, J. T. (2015) · Advances in Space Research · doi:10.1016/j.asr.2015.05.038 · Cited by 277
Metadata
- Authors
- Charlton, A. J., & Polvani, L. M.
- Venue
- Journal of Climate
- Publisher
- American Meteorological Society
- Published
- 2007-02-01
- Volume
- 20
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 449-469
- ISSN
- 0894-8755 (ISSN-L)
- 1520-0442
- OpenAlex
- W2103112181
- Cited by
- 1,132
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 16.89
- 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.