DYAMOND: the DYnamics of the Atmospheric general circulation Modeled On Non-hydrostatic Domains
Open accessAbstract
A review of the experimental protocol and motivation for DYAMOND, the first intercomparison project of global storm-resolving models, is presented. Nine models submitted simulation output for a 40-day (1 August–10 September 2016) intercomparison period. Eight of these employed a tiling of the sphere that was uniformly less than 5 km. By resolving the transient dynamics of convective storms in the tropics, global storm-resolving models remove the need to parameterize tropical deep convection, providing a fundamentally more sound representation of the climate system and a more natural link to commensurately high-resolution data from satellite-borne sensors. The models and some basic characteristics of their output are described in more detail, as is the availability and planned use of this output for future scientific study. Tropically and zonally averaged energy budgets, precipitable water distributions, and precipitation from the model ensemble are evaluated, as is their representation of tropical cyclones and the predictability of column water vapor, the latter being important for tropical weather.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Incorporating machine learning is a viable alternative to building increasingly detailed physical models for improving GCMs.
“Overall, NeuralGCM demonstrates that incorporating machine learning is a viable alternative to building increasingly detailed physical models32 for improving GCMs.”
From Neural general circulation models for weather and climate (2024) · cites this paper as [32]
Global cloud-resolving models, such as X-SHiELD, are considered state of the art, especially for simulating the hydrological cycle, owing to their resolution being capable of resolving deep convection.
“Global cloud-resolving models, such as X-SHiELD, are considered state of the art, especially for simulating the hydrological cycle, owing to their resolution being capable of resolving deep convection32.”
From Neural general circulation models for weather and climate (2024) · cites this paper as [32]
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Neural general circulation models for weather and climate
Kochkov, D., Yuval, J., Langmore, I., Norgaard, P., Smith, J., Mooers, G., Klöwer, M., Lottes, J., Rasp, S., Düben, P., et al. (2024) · Nature · doi:10.1038/s41586-024-07744-y · Cited by 454 · see citing works
“32 and 33).”
MethodClimate change impacts on wind power generation.
Pryor, S. C., Barthelmie, R. J., Bukovsky, M. S., Leung, L. R., & Sakaguchi, K. (2020) · Nature Reviews Earth & Environment · doi:10.1038/s43017-020-0101-7 · Cited by 364 · see citing works
Couvreux, F., Hourdin, F., Williamson, D., Roehrig, R., Volodina, V., Villefranque, N., Rio, C., Audouin, O., Salter, J., Bazile, E., et al. (2021) · Journal of Advances in Modeling Earth Systems · doi:10.1029/2020ms002217 · Cited by 121 · see citing works
Are general circulation models obsolete?
Balaji, V., Couvreux, F., Deshayes, J., Gautrais, J., Hourdin, F., & Rio, C. (2022) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.2202075119 · Cited by 84 · see citing works
Machine learning for the physics of climate
Bracco, A., Brajard, J., Dijkstra, H. A., Hassanzadeh, P., Lessig, C., & Monteleoni, C. (2024) · Nature Reviews Physics · doi:10.1038/s42254-024-00776-3 · Cited by 79 · see citing works
Qin, Y., Zelinka, M. D., & Klein, S. A. (2022) · Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres · doi:10.1029/2021jd035460 · Cited by 34 · see citing works
Barahona, D., Breen, K. H., Kalesse-Los, H., & Röttenbacher, J. (2024) · Artificial Intelligence for the Earth Systems · doi:10.1175/aies-d-23-0025.1 · Cited by 4 · see citing works
- Authors
- Stevens, B., Satoh, M., Auger, L., Biercamp, J., Bretherton, C. S., Chen, X., Düben, P., Judt, F., Khairoutdinov, M., Klocke, D., Kodama, C., Kornblueh, L., Lin, S.-J., Neumann, P., Putman, W. M., Röber, N., Shibuya, R., Vanniere, B., Vidale, P. L., Wedi, N., & Zhou, L.
- Affiliations
- Atmosphere and Ocean Research Institute, The University of Tokyo (JP)
- Centre National de Recherches Météorologiques (FR)
- German Climate Computing Centre (DE)
- University of Washington (US)
- NOAA Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory (US)
- NSF National Center for Atmospheric Research (US)
- Stony Brook University (US)
- Deutscher Wetterdienst (DE)
- Japan Agency for Marine-Earth Science and Technology (JP)
- Max Planck Institute for Meteorology (DE)
- Goddard Space Flight Center (US)
- National Centre for Atmospheric Science (GB)
- European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts (GB)
- ORCID
- Venue
- Progress in Earth and Planetary Science
- Published
- 2019-09-30
- Volume
- 6
- Issue
- 1
- ISSN
- 2197-4284 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2975081708
- Cited by
- 586
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 39 · 2025: 94 · 2024: 121 · 2023: 99 · 2022: 96 · 2021: 92 · 2020: 39 · 2019: 6
- FWCI
- 23.03
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Locations
- Progress in Earth and Planetary Science (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- CentAUR (University of Reading) (acceptedVersion)
- HAL (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- NOAA Institutional Repository (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- MPG.PuRe (Max Planck Society) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- Funders
- Natural Environment Research Council (jwcrp01003)
- 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 › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Oceanography › Oceanographic and Atmospheric Processes
- Keywords
- global storm-resolving models, model intercomparison, non-hydrostatic model, tropical deep convection, convective storms, tropical cyclones, energy balance, precipitable water vapor, precipitation, tropical weather
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
