Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 286

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The BRIDGE HadCM3 family of climate models: HadCM3@Bristol v1.0

Valdes, Paul J., Armstrong, Edward, Badger, Marcus P. S., Bradshaw, Catherine D., Bragg, Fran, Crucifix, Michel, Davies-Barnard, Taraka, Day, Jonathan J., Farnsworth, Alex, Gordon, Chris, Hopcroft, Peter O., Kennedy, Alan T., Lord, Natalie S., Lunt, Dan J., Marzocchi, Alice, Parry, Louise M., Pope, Vicky, Roberts, William H. G., Stone, Emma J., Tourte, Gregory J. L., Williams, Jonny H. T.·2017·Geoscientific Model Development
DOI 10.5194/gmd-10-3715-2017

Published version of a preprint

Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Abstract. Understanding natural and anthropogenic climate change processes involves using computational models that represent the main components of the Earth system: the atmosphere, ocean, sea ice, and land surface. These models have become increasingly computationally expensive as resolution is increased and more complex process representations are included. However, to gain robust insight into how climate may respond to a given forcing, and to meaningfully quantify the associated uncertainty, it is often required to use either or both ensemble approaches and very long integrations. For this reason, more computationally efficient models can be very valuable tools. Here we provide a comprehensive overview of the suite of climate models based around the HadCM3 coupled general circulation model. This model was developed at the UK Met Office and has been heavily used during the last 15 years for a range of future (and past) climate change studies, but has now been largely superseded for many scientific studies by more recently developed models. However, it continues to be extensively used by various institutions, including the BRIDGE (Bristol Research Initiative for the Dynamic Global Environment) research group at the University of Bristol, who have made modest adaptations to the base HadCM3 model over time. These adaptations mean that the original documentation is not entirely representative, and several other relatively undocumented configurations are in use. We therefore describe the key features of a number of configurations of the HadCM3 climate model family, which together make up HadCM3@Bristol version 1.0. In order to differentiate variants that have undergone development at BRIDGE, we have introduced the letter B into the model nomenclature. We include descriptions of the atmosphere-only model (HadAM3B), the coupled model with a low-resolution ocean (HadCM3BL), the high-resolution atmosphere-only model (HadAM3BH), and the regional model (HadRM3B). These also include three versions of the land surface scheme. By comparing with observational datasets, we show that these models produce a good representation of many aspects of the climate system, including the land and sea surface temperatures, precipitation, ocean circulation, and vegetation. This evaluation, combined with the relatively fast computational speed (up to 1000 times faster than some CMIP6 models), motivates continued development and scientific use of the HadCM3B family of coupled climate models, predominantly for quantifying uncertainty and for long multi-millennial-scale simulations.

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 · 10.5194/gmd-10-3715-2017

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Figures

Figure 1 Land-sea mask and orography (sea coloured grey, land height in metres) for four configurations of HadRM3B. (a) shows the standard European domain at 0.44 resolution, (b) shows the equivalent domain for East Asia, (c) shows a configuration for the Arctic and Svalbard at 0.22 (as used in Day et al., 2012), and (d) a North America/European configuration for the early Cretaceous at 0.44 resolution (as used in Haywood et al., 2004).
Figure 1 Land-sea mask and orography (sea coloured grey, land height in metres) for four configurations of HadRM3B. (a) shows the standard European domain at 0.44 resolution, (b) shows the equivalent domain for East Asia, (c) shows a configuration for the Arctic and Svalbard at 0.22 (as used in Day et al., 2012), and (d) a North America/European configuration for the early Cretaceous at 0.44 resolution (as used in Haywood et al., 2004).CC-BY · From the PDF
Figure 2 Relative error measure of the CMIP5 models (21 in total; in black) and the BRIDGE models (4 in total; in red) performance. Error measure is calculated from a time-space root-mean square error (RMSE) of contemporary and predecessor CMIP5 model historical climatological (1980-2005) seasonal cycle simulations and BRIDGE pre-industrial seasonal cycle climatologies against observations (1980-2005) for a set of nine different atmospheric variables. Error for each individual variable is characterised as a relative error by normalising the result of the median error of all model results (Gleckler et al., 2008); the BRIDGE models are not included in the mean/median error. For instance, a value of 0.20 indicates that a model's RMSE is 20 % larger than the median CMIP5 error for that variable, whereas a value of 0.20 means the error is 20 % smaller than the median error. The diagonal split grid square shows the relative error for the reference observed/reanalysis dataset (lower right triangle) and the alternative dataset (top left triangle). White triangles/boxes indicate where no data were available. Evaluated global atmospheric variables are TOA outgoing all-sky short-wave radiation (rsut_Glob), TOA outgoing all-sky outgoing long-wave radiation (rlut_Glob), precipitation (pr_Glob), near-surface temperature (tas_Glob), specific humidity at 400 hPa (hus_Glob-400), geopotential at 500 hPa (zg_Glob-500), V-wind at 200 hPa (va_Glob-200), V-wind at 850 hPa (va_Glob-850), U-wind at 200 hPa (ua_Glob-200), U-wind at 850 hPa (ua_Glob-850), temperature at 200 hPa (ta_Glob-200), and temperature at 850 hPa (ta_Glob-850).
Figure 2 Relative error measure of the CMIP5 models (21 in total; in black) and the BRIDGE models (4 in total; in red) performance. Error measure is calculated from a time-space root-mean square error (RMSE) of contemporary and predecessor CMIP5 model historical climatological (1980-2005) seasonal cycle simulations and BRIDGE pre-industrial seasonal cycle climatologies against observations (1980-2005) for a set of nine different atmospheric variables. Error for each individual variable is characterised as a relative error by normalising the result of the median error of all model results (Gleckler et al., 2008); the BRIDGE models are not included in the mean/median error. For instance, a value of 0.20 indicates that a model's RMSE is 20 % larger than the median CMIP5 error for that variable, whereas a value of 0.20 means the error is 20 % smaller than the median error. The diagonal split grid square shows the relative error for the reference observed/reanalysis dataset (lower right triangle) and the alternative dataset (top left triangle). White triangles/boxes indicate where no data were available. Evaluated global atmospheric variables are TOA outgoing all-sky short-wave radiation (rsut_Glob), TOA outgoing all-sky outgoing long-wave radiation (rlut_Glob), precipitation (pr_Glob), near-surface temperature (tas_Glob), specific humidity at 400 hPa (hus_Glob-400), geopotential at 500 hPa (zg_Glob-500), V-wind at 200 hPa (va_Glob-200), V-wind at 850 hPa (va_Glob-850), U-wind at 200 hPa (ua_Glob-200), U-wind at 850 hPa (ua_Glob-850), temperature at 200 hPa (ta_Glob-200), and temperature at 850 hPa (ta_Glob-850).CC-BY · From the PDF
Figure 3 (a) The difference between the annual mean surface air temperature (in C) of HadCM3B-M1 and the CRU CL v2.0 for the period 1960-1990 regridded onto the HadCM3B-M1 grid, (b) As (a) for the HadCM3B-M2.1a version, (c) As (a) but for HadCM3B-M2.2, (d) As (a) but for the HadCM3BL-M2.1aN version, (e) As (a) but for HadAM3B-M2.1a, (f) As (a) but for HadAM3BH-M2.1a, (g) As (a) but for FAMOUS-M1, and (h) As (a) but for FAMOUS-M2.2. Panels (i, j, k, l) show comparable results for four CMIP5 models, ACCESS1-0, CCSM4, GISS-E2-H and IPSL-CM5A-LR respectively. These were chosen to represent two models which were above the CMIP5 average in terms of their RMSE with respect to surface air temperature, and two models which were below average. All differences are calculated by regridding the CRU data onto the corresponding model grid, using simple bi-linear interpolation.
Figure 3 (a) The difference between the annual mean surface air temperature (in C) of HadCM3B-M1 and the CRU CL v2.0 for the period 1960-1990 regridded onto the HadCM3B-M1 grid, (b) As (a) for the HadCM3B-M2.1a version, (c) As (a) but for HadCM3B-M2.2, (d) As (a) but for the HadCM3BL-M2.1aN version, (e) As (a) but for HadAM3B-M2.1a, (f) As (a) but for HadAM3BH-M2.1a, (g) As (a) but for FAMOUS-M1, and (h) As (a) but for FAMOUS-M2.2. Panels (i, j, k, l) show comparable results for four CMIP5 models, ACCESS1-0, CCSM4, GISS-E2-H and IPSL-CM5A-LR respectively. These were chosen to represent two models which were above the CMIP5 average in terms of their RMSE with respect to surface air temperature, and two models which were below average. All differences are calculated by regridding the CRU data onto the corresponding model grid, using simple bi-linear interpolation.CC-BY · From the PDF
Figure 4 As for Fig. 3 but showing the difference in mean annual precipitation, expressed as a % difference to the CRU CL v2.0 observations.
Figure 4 As for Fig. 3 but showing the difference in mean annual precipitation, expressed as a % difference to the CRU CL v2.0 observations.CC-BY · From the PDF
Figure 5 The annual mean northward heat transport in total, the atmosphere, and the ocean. The black line shows the observational estimate, blue HadCM3B-M2.1a, green HadCM3BL-M2.1a, and red FAMOUS-M2.2; grey lines show transports for a selection of CMIP5 models. These transports are calculated as the implied heat transports from the TOA and surface energy fluxes (see Trenberth and Fasullo, 2013, for details). Observational estimates for the total transport are derived from the CERES data.
Figure 5 The annual mean northward heat transport in total, the atmosphere, and the ocean. The black line shows the observational estimate, blue HadCM3B-M2.1a, green HadCM3BL-M2.1a, and red FAMOUS-M2.2; grey lines show transports for a selection of CMIP5 models. These transports are calculated as the implied heat transports from the TOA and surface energy fluxes (see Trenberth and Fasullo, 2013, for details). Observational estimates for the total transport are derived from the CERES data.CC-BY · From the PDF
Figure 6 Annual mean sea surface temperature differences (in C) for a range of coupled model simulations, and also for the same four CMIP5 models used in Figs. 3 and 4. The observational dataset is the Levitus World Ocean Atlas (2009) (Locarnini et al., 2010). The figure shows the difference in SST between model and observations for (a) HadCM3B-M1, (b) HadCM3B-M2.1a, (c) HadCM3B-M2.2, (d) HadCM3BL-M2.1a, (e) FAMOUS-M1, (f) FAMOUS-M2.2, (g) ACCESS1.0, (h) CCSM4, (i) GISS-E2-H, and (j) IPSL-CM5A-LR. Model output is regridded to the same resolution of the observations.
Figure 6 Annual mean sea surface temperature differences (in C) for a range of coupled model simulations, and also for the same four CMIP5 models used in Figs. 3 and 4. The observational dataset is the Levitus World Ocean Atlas (2009) (Locarnini et al., 2010). The figure shows the difference in SST between model and observations for (a) HadCM3B-M1, (b) HadCM3B-M2.1a, (c) HadCM3B-M2.2, (d) HadCM3BL-M2.1a, (e) FAMOUS-M1, (f) FAMOUS-M2.2, (g) ACCESS1.0, (h) CCSM4, (i) GISS-E2-H, and (j) IPSL-CM5A-LR. Model output is regridded to the same resolution of the observations.CC-BY · From the PDF
Figure 7 As Fig. 6 but showing the differences in sea surface salinity (in gkg 1 ) between models and observations. (a) HadCM3B-M1, (b) HadCM3B-M2.1a, (c) HadCM3B-M2.2, (d) HadCM3BL-M2.1a, (e) FAMOUS-M1, (f) FAMOUS-M2.2, (g) GISS-E2-H, and (h) IPSLCM5A-LR. The observational dataset is the Levitus World Ocean Atlas (2009) (Antonov et al., 2010). Model output is regridded to the same resolution of the observations.
Figure 7 As Fig. 6 but showing the differences in sea surface salinity (in gkg 1 ) between models and observations. (a) HadCM3B-M1, (b) HadCM3B-M2.1a, (c) HadCM3B-M2.2, (d) HadCM3BL-M2.1a, (e) FAMOUS-M1, (f) FAMOUS-M2.2, (g) GISS-E2-H, and (h) IPSLCM5A-LR. The observational dataset is the Levitus World Ocean Atlas (2009) (Antonov et al., 2010). Model output is regridded to the same resolution of the observations.CC-BY · From the PDF
Figure 8 Annual depth profiles of the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation (AMOC) at 26.25 N showing the range of values for variants of HadCM3B, HadCM3BL, and FAMOUS. Annual data from the RAPID array at 26.5 N are highlighted in grey. The depth at which the AMOC reaches its maximum is indicated with a point.
Figure 8 Annual depth profiles of the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation (AMOC) at 26.25 N showing the range of values for variants of HadCM3B, HadCM3BL, and FAMOUS. Annual data from the RAPID array at 26.5 N are highlighted in grey. The depth at which the AMOC reaches its maximum is indicated with a point.CC-BY · From the PDF
Figure 9 Maps of the dominant plant functional type for observations (a) and model simulations of the pre-industrial. The models shown are (b) HadCM3B-M2.1aD (c) HadCM3BL-M2.1aD and (d) HadAM3B-M2.1aD. The observed dataset for comparison is Ramankutty and Foley (1999).
Figure 9 Maps of the dominant plant functional type for observations (a) and model simulations of the pre-industrial. The models shown are (b) HadCM3B-M2.1aD (c) HadCM3BL-M2.1aD and (d) HadAM3B-M2.1aD. The observed dataset for comparison is Ramankutty and Foley (1999).CC-BY · From the PDF
Figure 10 The latitudinal average NPP in gCm 2 yr 1 . CMIP5 models without dynamic vegetation plotted here are CCSM4 and IPSL-CM5A-LR. CMIP5 models with dynamic vegetation plotted here are MIROC-ESM and MPI-ESM.
Figure 10 The latitudinal average NPP in gCm 2 yr 1 . CMIP5 models without dynamic vegetation plotted here are CCSM4 and IPSL-CM5A-LR. CMIP5 models with dynamic vegetation plotted here are MIROC-ESM and MPI-ESM.CC-BY · From the PDF

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

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?

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

Show all 3 references

Research works printed but not linked: 113

  1. Adam, J. C., Clark, E. A., Lettenmaier, D. P., and Wood, E. F.: Correction of Global Precipitation Products for Orographic Effects, J. Climate, 19, 15–38, https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI3604.1, 2006. · DOI
  2. Arakawa, A. and Lamb, V. R.: Computational Design of the Basic Dynamical Processes of the UCLA General Circulation Model, in: General Circulation Models of the Atmosphere, edited by: Chang, J., Vol. 17, Methods in Computational Physics: Advances in Research and Applications, 173–265, Elsevier, https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-460817-7.50009-4, 1977. · DOI
  3. Armstrong, E., Valdes, P., House, J., and Singarayer, J.: The Role of CO2 and Dynamic Vegetation on the Impact of Temperate Land-Use Change in the HadCM3 Coupled Climate Model, Earth Interact., 20, 1–20, https://doi.org/10.1175/EI-D-15-0036.1, 2016. · DOI
  4. Arnell, N. W., Hudson, D. A., and Jones, R. G.: Climate change scenarios from a regional climate model: Estimating change in runoff in southern Africa, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 108, 4519, https://doi.org/10.1029/2002JD002782, 2003. · DOI
  5. Beerling, D. J., Fox, A., Stevenson, D. S., and Valdes, P. J.: Enhanced chemistry-climate feedbacks in past greenhouse worlds, P. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 108, 9770–9774, https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1102409108, 2011. · DOI · Paper page
  6. Best, M. J., Pryor, M., Clark, D. B., Rooney, G. G., Essery, R. L. H., Ménard, C. B., Edwards, J. M., Hendry, M. A., Porson, A., Gedney, N., Mercado, L. M., Sitch, S., Blyth, E., Boucher, O., Cox, P. M., Grimmond, C. S. B., and Harding, R. J.: The Joint UK Land Environment Simulator (JULES), model description – Part 1: Energy and water fluxes, Geosci. Model Dev., 4, 677–699, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-4-677-2011, 2011. · DOI
  7. Betts, R. A., Cox, P. M., Collins, M., Harris, P. P., Huntingford, C., and Jones, C. D.: The role of ecosystem-atmosphere interactions in simulated Amazonian precipitation decrease and forest dieback under global climate warming, Theor. Appl. Climatol., 78, 157–175, 2004. · DOI
  8. Bhaskaran, B., Jones, R. G., Murphy, J. M., and Noguer, M.: Simulations of the Indian summer monsoon using a nested regional climate model: domain size experiments, Clim. Dynam., 12, 573–587, https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00216267, 1996. · DOI
  9. Booth, B. B. B., Jones, C. D., Collins, M., Totterdell, I. J., Cox, P. M., Sitch, S., Huntingford, C., Betts, R. A., Harris, G. R., and Lloyd, J.: High sensitivity of future global warming to land carbon cycle processes, Environ. Res. Lett., 7, 024002, https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/7/2/024002, 2012. · DOI
  10. Braconnot, P., Otto-Bliesner, B., Harrison, S., Joussaume, S., Peterchmitt, J.-Y., Abe-Ouchi, A., Crucifix, M., Driesschaert, E., Fichefet, Th., Hewitt, C. D., Kageyama, M., Kitoh, A., Laîné, A., Loutre, M.-F., Marti, O., Merkel, U., Ramstein, G., Valdes, P., Weber, S. L., Yu, Y., and Zhao, Y.: Results of PMIP2 coupled simulations of the Mid-Holocene and Last Glacial Maximum – Part 1: experiments and large-scale features, Clim. Past, 3, 261–277, https://doi.org/10.5194/cp-3-261-2007, 2007. · DOI
  11. Bradshaw, C. D., Lunt, D. J., Flecker, R., and Davies-Barnard, T.: Disentangling the roles of late Miocene palaeogeography and vegetation – Implications for climate sensitivity, Palaeogeogr. Palaeocl., 417, 17–34, 2015. · DOI
  12. Bragg, F. J., Lunt, D. J., and Haywood, A. M.: Mid-Pliocene climate modelled using the UK Hadley Centre Model: PlioMIP Experiments 1 and 2, Geosci. Model Dev., 5, 1109–1125, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-5-1109-2012, 2012. · DOI
  13. Bryan, K. and Cox, M. D.: An Approximate Equation of State for Numerical Models of Ocean Circulation, J. Phys. Oceanogr., 2, 510–514, https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0485(1972)002<0510:AAEOSF>2.0.CO;2, 1972. · DOI
  14. Clark, D. B., Mercado, L. M., Sitch, S., Jones, C. D., Gedney, N., Best, M. J., Pryor, M., Rooney, G. G., Essery, R. L. H., Blyth, E., Boucher, O., Harding, R. J., Huntingford, C., and Cox, P. M.: The Joint UK Land Environment Simulator (JULES), model description – Part 2: Carbon fluxes and vegetation dynamics, Geosci. Model Dev., 4, 701–722, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-4-701-2011, 2011. · DOI
  15. Claussen, M., Mysak, L., Weaver, A., Crucifix, M., Fichefet, T., Loutre, M.-F., Weber, S., Alcamo, J., Alexeev, V., Berger, A., Calov, R., Ganopolski, A., Goosse, H., Lohmann, G., Lunkeit, F., Mokhov, I., Petoukhov, V., Stone, P., and Wang, Z.: Earth system models of intermediate complexity: closing the gap in the spectrum of climate system models, Clim. Dynam., 18, 579–586, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-001-0200-1, 2002. · DOI
  16. Collins, M., Tett, S. F. B., and Cooper, C.: The internal climate variability of HadCM3, a version of the Hadley Centre coupled model without flux adjustments, Clim. Dynam., 17, 61–81, https://doi.org/10.1007/s003820000094, 2001. · DOI · Paper page
  17. Collins, W. J., Bellouin, N., Doutriaux-Boucher, M., Gedney, N., Halloran, P., Hinton, T., Hughes, J., Jones, C. D., Joshi, M., Liddicoat, S., Martin, G., O'Connor, F., Rae, J., Senior, C., Sitch, S., Totterdell, I., Wiltshire, A., and Woodward, S.: Development and evaluation of an Earth-System model – HadGEM2, Geosci. Model Dev., 4, 1051–1075, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-4-1051-2011, 2011. · DOI
  18. Cox, P. M., Huntingford, C., and Harding, R. J.: A canopy conductance and photosynthesis model for use in a GCM land surface scheme, J. Hydrol., 212–213, 79–94, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-1694(98)00203-0, 1998. · DOI
  19. Cox, P. M., Betts, R. A., Bunton, C. B., Essery, R. L. H., Rowntree, P. R., and Smith, J.: The impact of new land surface physics on the GCM simulation of climate and climate sensitivity, Clim. Dynam., 15, 183–203, https://doi.org/10.1007/s003820050276, 1999. · DOI
  20. Cox, P. M., Betts, R. A., Jones, C. D., Spall, S. A., and Totterdell, I. J.: Acceleration of global warming due to carbon-cycle feedbacks in a coupled climate model, Nature, 408, 184–187, https://doi.org/10.1038/35041539, 2000. · DOI
  21. Cusack, S., Slingo, A., Edwards, J. M., and Wild, M.: The radiative impact of a simple aerosol climatology on the Hadley Centre atmospheric GCM, Q. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc., 124, 2517–2526, https://doi.org/10.1002/qj.49712455117, 1998. · DOI
  22. Davies-Barnard, T., Valdes, P. J., Jones, C. D., and Singarayer, J. S.: Sensitivity of a coupled climate model to canopy interception capacity, Clim. Dynam., 42, 1715–1732, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-014-2100-1, 2014. · DOI
  23. Day, J. J., Bamber, J. L., Valdes, P. J., and Kohler, J.: The impact of a seasonally ice free Arctic Ocean on the temperature, precipitation and surface mass balance of Svalbard, The Cryosphere, 6, 35–50, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-6-35-2012, 2012. · DOI
  24. Day, J. J., Bamber, J. L., and Valdes, P. J.: The Greenland Ice Sheet's surface mass balance in a seasonally sea ice-free Arctic, J. Geophys. Res.-Earth, 118, 1533–1544, https://doi.org/10.1002/jgrf.20112, 2013. · DOI
  25. Demory, M.-E., Vidale, P. L., Roberts, M. J., Berrisford, P., Strachan, J., Schiemann, R., and Mizielinski, M. S.: The role of horizontal resolution in simulating drivers of the global hydrological cycle, Clim. Dynam., 42, 2201–2225, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-013-1924-4, 2014. · DOI
  26. Dolan, A. M., Haywood, A. M., Hunter, S. J., Tindall, J. C., Dowsett, H. J., Hill, D. J., and Pickering, S. J.: Modelling the enigmatic Late Pliocene Glacial Event – Marine Isotope Stage M2, Global Planet. Change, 128, 47–60, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloplacha.2015.02.001, 2015. · DOI
  27. Durman, C. F., Gregory, J. M., Hassell, D. C., Jones, R. G., and Murphy, J. M.: A comparison of extreme European daily precipitation simulated by a global and a regional climate model for present and future climates, Q. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc., 127, 1005–1015, https://doi.org/10.1002/qj.49712757316, 2001. · DOI
  28. Edwards, J. M. and Slingo, A.: Studies with a flexible new radiation code. I: Choosing a configuration for a large-scale model, Q. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc., 122, 689–719, https://doi.org/10.1002/qj.49712253107, 1996. · DOI
  29. Essery, R. L. H., Best, M. J., Betts, R. A., Cox, P. M., and Taylor, C. M.: Explicit Representation of Subgrid Heterogeneity in a GCM Land Surface Scheme, J. Hydrometeorol., 4, 530–543, https://doi.org/10.1175/1525-7541(2003)004<0530:EROSHI>2.0.CO;2, 2003. · DOI
  30. Eyring, V., Righi, M., Lauer, A., Evaldsson, M., Wenzel, S., Jones, C., Anav, A., Andrews, O., Cionni, I., Davin, E. L., Deser, C., Ehbrecht, C., Friedlingstein, P., Gleckler, P., Gottschaldt, K.-D., Hagemann, S., Juckes, M., Kindermann, S., Krasting, J., Kunert, D., Levine, R., Loew, A., Mäkelä, J., Martin, G., Mason, E., Phillips, A. S., Read, S., Rio, C., Roehrig, R., Senftleben, D., Sterl, A., van Ulft, L. H., Walton, J., Wang, S., and Williams, K. D.: ESMValTool (v1.0) – a community diagnostic and performance metrics tool for routine evaluation of Earth system models in CMIP, Geosci. Model Dev., 9, 1747–1802, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-1747-2016, 2016b. · DOI
  31. Ferraro, R., Waliser, D. E., Glecker, P., Taylor, K. E., and Eyring, V.: Evolving obs4MIPS to support the Sixth Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP6), Am. Metereol. Soc., 131–133, https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-14-00216.1, 2015. · DOI
  32. Flato, G., Marotzke, J., Abiodun, B., Braconnot, P., Chou, S., Collins, W., Cox, P. M., Driouech, F., Emori, S., Eyring, V., Forest, C., Gleckler, P., Guilyardi, E., Jakob, C., Kattsov, V., Reason, C., and Rummukainen, M.: Evaluation of Climate Models, in: Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, edited by: Stocker, T., Qin, D., Plattner, G.-K., Tignor, M., Allen, S., Boschung, J., Nauels, A., Xia, Y., Bex, V., and Midgley, P., chap. 9, 741–866, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK and New York, NY, USA, https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107415324.020, 2013. · DOI
  33. Gent, P. R. and McWilliams, J. C.: Isopycnal Mixing in Ocean Circulation Models, J. Phys. Oceanogr., 20, 150–155, 1990. · DOI
  34. Gleckler, P. J., Taylor, K. E., and Doutriaux, C.: Performance metrics for climate models, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 113, d06104, https://doi.org/10.1029/2007JD008972, 2008. · DOI · Paper page
  35. Goosse, H., Brovkin, V., Fichefet, T., Haarsma, R., Huybrechts, P., Jongma, J., Mouchet, A., Selten, F., Barriat, P.-Y., Campin, J.-M., Deleersnijder, E., Driesschaert, E., Goelzer, H., Janssens, I., Loutre, M.-F., Morales Maqueda, M. A., Opsteegh, T., Mathieu, P.-P., Munhoven, G., Pettersson, E. J., Renssen, H., Roche, D. M., Schaeffer, M., Tartinville, B., Timmermann, A., and Weber, S. L.: Description of the Earth system model of intermediate complexity LOVECLIM version 1.2, Geosci. Model Dev., 3, 603–633, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-3-603-2010, 2010. · DOI
  36. Gordon, C., Cooper, C., Senior, C. A., Banks, H., Gregory, J. M., Johns, T. C., Mitchell, J. F. B., and Wood, R. A.: The simulation of SST, sea ice extents and ocean heat transports in a version of the Hadley Centre coupled model without flux adjustments, Clim. Dynam., 16, 147–168, https://doi.org/10.1007/s003820050010, 2000. · DOI
  37. Gregory, D., Kershaw, R., and Inness, P. M.: Parametrization of momentum transport by convection. II: Tests in single-column and general circulation models, Q. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc., 123, 1153–1183, https://doi.org/10.1002/qj.49712354103, 1997. · DOI
  38. Gregory, D., Shutts, G. J., and Mitchell, J. R.: A new gravity-wave-drag scheme incorporating anisotropic orography and low-level wave breaking: Impact upon the climate of the UK Meteorological Office Unified Model, Q. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc., 124, 463–493, https://doi.org/10.1002/qj.49712454606, 1998. · DOI
  39. Gregory, J. M., Ingram, W. J., Palmer, M. A., Jones, G. S., Stott, P. A., Thorpe, R. B., Lowe, J. A., Johns, T. C., and Williams, K. D.: A new method for diagnosing radiative forcing and climate sensitivity, Geophys. Res. Lett., 31, L03205, https://doi.org/10.1029/2003gl018747, 2004. · DOI · Paper page
  40. Gregory, J. M., Browne, O. J. H., Payne, A. J., Ridley, J. K., and Rutt, I. C.: Modelling large-scale ice-sheet-climate interactions following glacial inception, Clim. Past, 8, 1565–1580, https://doi.org/10.5194/cp-8-1565-2012, 2012. · DOI
  41. Griffies, S., Gnanadesikan, A., Pacanowski, R., Larichev, V. D., Dukowicz, J. K., and Smith, R. D.: Oceanic isopycnal mixing by coordinate rotation, J. Phys. Oceanogr., 28, 805–830, 1998. · DOI
  42. The HadGEM2 Development Team: G. M. Martin, Bellouin, N., Collins, W. J., Culverwell, I. D., Halloran, P. R., Hardiman, S. C., Hinton, T. J., Jones, C. D., McDonald, R. E., McLaren, A. J., O'Connor, F. M., Roberts, M. J., Rodriguez, J. M., Woodward, S., Best, M. J., Brooks, M. E., Brown, A. R., Butchart, N., Dearden, C., Derbyshire, S. H., Dharssi, I., Doutriaux-Boucher, M., Edwards, J. M., Falloon, P. D., Gedney, N., Gray, L. J., Hewitt, H. T., Hobson, M., Huddleston, M. R., Hughes, J., Ineson, S., Ingram, W. J., James, P. M., Johns, T. C., Johnson, C. E., Jones, A., Jones, C. P., Joshi, M. M., Keen, A. B., Liddicoat, S., Lock, A. P., Maidens, A. V., Manners, J. C., Milton, S. F., Rae, J. G. L., Ridley, J. K., Sellar, A., Senior, C. A., Totterdell, I. J., Verhoef, A., Vidale, P. L., and Wiltshire, A.: The HadGEM2 family of Met Office Unified Model climate configurations, Geosci. Model Dev., 4, 723–757, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-4-723-2011, 2011. · DOI
  43. Hawkins, E., Smith, R. S., Allison, L. C., Gregory, J. M., Woollings, T. J., Pohlmann, H., and de Cuevas, B.: Bistability of the Atlantic overturning circulation in a global climate model and links to ocean freshwater transport, Geophys. Res. Lett., 38, L10605, https://doi.org/10.1029/2011gl047208, 2011. · DOI
  44. Haywood, A. M., Valdes, P. J., and Markwick, P. J.: Cretaceous (Wealden) climates: a modelling perspective, Cretaceous Res., 25, 303–311, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cretres.2004.01.005, 2004. · DOI
  45. Hewitt, C. D., Broccoli, A. J., Mitchell, J. F. B., and Stouffer, R. J.: A coupled model study of the Last Glacial Maximum: Was part of the North Atlantic relatively warm?, Geophys. Res. Lett., 28, 1571–1574, https://doi.org/10.1029/2000GL012575, 2001. · DOI
  46. Hibler, W. D.: A Dynamic Thermodynamic Sea Ice Model, J. Phys. Oceanogr., 9, 815–846, https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0485(1979)009<0815:ADTSIM>2.0.CO;2, 1979. · DOI
  47. Hopcroft, P. O., Valdes, P. J., Wania, R., and Beerling, D. J.: Limited response of peatland CH4 emissions to abrupt Atlantic Ocean circulation changes in glacial climates, Clim. Past, 10, 137–154, https://doi.org/10.5194/cp-10-137-2014, 2014. · DOI
  48. Hughes, J. K., Valdes, P. J., and Betts, R. A.: Dynamics of a global-scale vegetation model, Ecol. Model., 198, 452–462, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2006.05.020, 2006. · DOI
  49. IPCC: Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, edited by: Solomon, S., Qin, D., Manning, M., Chen, Z., Marquis, M., Avery, K., Tignor, M., and Miller, H., Cambridge University Press, 2007.
  50. Irvine, P. J., Ridgwell, A., and Lunt, D. J.: Assessing the regional disparities in geoengineering impacts, Geophys. Res. Lett., 37, L18702, https://doi.org/10.1029/2010GL044447, 2010. · DOI
  51. Jackson, L. and Vellinga, M.: Multidecadal to Centennial Variability of the AMOC: HadCM3 and a Perturbed Physics Ensemble, J. Climate, 26, 2390–2407, https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-11-00601.1, 2013. · DOI
  52. Johns, T. C., Gregory, J. M., Ingram, W. J., Johnson, C. E., Lowe, J. A., Mitchell, J. F. B., Roberts, D. L., Sexton, D. M. H., Stevenson, D., Tett, S. F. B., and Woodage, M. J.: Anthropogenic climate change for 1860 to 2100 simulated with the HadCM3 model under updated emissions scenarios, Clim. Dynam., 20, 583–612, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-002-0296-y, 2003. · DOI
  53. Jones, C.: A Fast Ocean GCM without Flux Adjustments, J. Atmos. Ocean. Technol., 20, 1857–1868, https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0426(2003)020<1857:AFOGWF>2.0.CO;2, 2003. · DOI
  54. Jones, C., Gregory, J., Thorpe, R., Cox, P., Murphy, J., Sexton, D., and Valdes, P. J.: Systematic optimisation and climate simulation of FAMOUS, a fast version of HadCM3, Clim. Dynam., 25, 189–204, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-005-0027-2, 2005. · DOI
  55. Jones, R. G., Murphy, J. M., and Noguer, M.: Simulation of climate change over europe using a nested regional-climate model. I: Assessment of control climate, including sensitivity to location of lateral boundaries, Q. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc., 121, 1413–1449, https://doi.org/10.1002/qj.49712152610, 1995. · DOI
  56. Kennedy, A. T., Farnsworth, A., Lunt, D. J., Lear, C. H., and Markwick, P. J.: Atmospheric and oceanic impacts of Antarctic glaciation across the Eocene–Oligocene transition, Philos. T. R. Soc., A, 373, 20140419, https://doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2014.0419, 2015. · DOI · Paper page
  57. Kraus, E. B. and Turner, J. S.: A one-dimensional model of the seasonal thermocline II. The general theory and its consequences, Tellus, 19, 98–106, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2153-3490.1967.tb01462.x, 1967. · DOI
  58. Legg, S., Briegleb, B., Chang, Y., Chassignet, E. P., Danabasoglu, G., Ezer, T., Gordon, A. L., Griffies, S., Hallberg, R., Jackson, L., Large, W., Ozgokmen, T. M., Peters, H., Price, J., Riemenschneider, U., Wu, W. L., Xu, X. B., and Yang, J. Y.: Improving Oceanic Overflow Representation in Climate Models: The Gravity Current Entrainment Climate Process Team, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 90, 657–670, https://doi.org/10.1175/2008bams2667.1, 2009. · DOI
  59. Liu, W., Liu, Z. Y., and Brady, E. C.: Why is the AMOC Monostable in Coupled General Circulation Models?, J. Climate, 27, 2427–2443, https://doi.org/10.1175/Jcli-D-13-00264.1, 2014. · DOI
  60. Loeb, N., Wang, H., Cheng, A., Kato, S., Fasullo, J., Xu, K.-M., and Allan, R.: Observational constraints on atmospheric and oceanic cross-equatorial heat transports: revisiting the precipitation asymmetry problem in climate models, Clim. Dynam., 46, 3239–3257, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-015-2766-z, 2016. · DOI
  61. Loptson, C. A., Lunt, D. J., and Francis, J. E.: Investigating vegetation–climate feedbacks during the early Eocene, Clim. Past, 10, 419–436, https://doi.org/10.5194/cp-10-419-2014, 2014. · DOI
  62. Loveland, T. R. and Belward, A. S.: The IGBP-DIS global 1 km land cover data set, DISCover: First results, Int. J. Remote Sens., 18, 3289–3295, https://doi.org/10.1080/014311697217099, 1997. · DOI
  63. Lunt, D. J., Ridgwell, A., Valdes, P. J., and Seale, A.: “Sunshade World”: A fully coupled GCM evaluation of the climatic impacts of geoengineering, Geophys. Res. Lett., 35, L12710, https://doi.org/10.1029/2008GL033674, 2008. · DOI
  64. Lunt, D. J., Farnsworth, A., Loptson, C., Foster, G. L., Markwick, P., O'Brien, C. L., Pancost, R. D., Robinson, S. A., and Wrobel, N.: Palaeogeographic controls on climate and proxy interpretation, Clim. Past, 12, 1181–1198, https://doi.org/10.5194/cp-12-1181-2016, 2016. · DOI · Paper page
  65. Malhi, Y., Aragão, L. E. O. C., Galbraith, D., Huntingford, C., Fisher, R., Zelazowski, P., Sitch, S., McSweeney, C., and Meir, P.: Exploring the likelihood and mechanism of a climate-change-induced dieback of the Amazon rainforest, P. Natl. Acad. Sci., 106, 20610–20615, https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0804619106, 2009. · DOI · Paper page
  66. Marzocchi, A., Hirschi, J. J.-M., Holliday, N. P., Cunningham, S. A., Blaker, A. T., and Coward, A. C.: The North Atlantic subpolar circulation in an eddy-resolving global ocean model, J. Marine Syst., 142, 126–143, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmarsys.2014.10.007, 2015a. · DOI
  67. Marzocchi, A., Lunt, D. J., Flecker, R., Bradshaw, C. D., Farnsworth, A., and Hilgen, F. J.: Orbital control on late Miocene climate and the North African monsoon: insight from an ensemble of sub-precessional simulations, Clim. Past, 11, 1271–1295, https://doi.org/10.5194/cp-11-1271-2015, 2015b. · DOI · Paper page
  68. Matthews, D. (Ed.): Unified Model User Guide, The Meteorological Office, Bracknell, Berkshire, UK, available at: http://www.ukscience.org/_Media/UM_User_Guide.pdf (last access: 8 September 2017), 1998.
  69. McCarthy, G., Frajka-Williams, E., Johns, W. E., Baringer, M. O., Meinen, C. S., Bryden, H. L., Rayner, D., Duchez, A., Roberts, C., and Cunningham, S. A.: Observed interannual variability of the Atlantic meridional overturning circulation at 26.5° N, Geophys. Res. Lett., 39, https://doi.org/10.1029/2012gl052933, 2012. · DOI
  70. Msadek, R., Johns, W. E., Yeager, S. G., Danabasoglu, G., Delworth, T. L., and Rosati, A.: The Atlantic Meridional Heat Transport at 26.5° N and Its Relationship with the MOC in the RAPID Array and the GFDL and NCAR Coupled Models, J. Climate, 26, 4335–4356, https://doi.org/10.1175/Jcli-D-12-00081.1, 2013. · DOI
  71. Murphy, J. M., Booth, B. B. B., Collins, M., Harris, G. R., Sexton, D. M. H., and Webb, M. J.: A methodology for probabilistic predictions of regional climate change from perturbed physics ensembles, Philos. T. R. Soc. Lond. A, 365, 1993–2028, https://doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2007.2077, 2007. · DOI
  72. New, M., Lister, D., Hulme, M., and Makin, I.: A high-resolution data set of surface climate over global land areas, Clim. Res., 21, 1–25, https://doi.org/10.3354/cr021001, 2002. · DOI
  73. Pacanowski, R. and Philander, S.: Parametrisation of vertical mixing in numerical models of tropical oceans, J. Phys. Oceanogr., 11, 1443–1451, 1981. · DOI
  74. Pardaens, A. K., Banks, H. T., Gregory, J. M., and Rowntree, P. R.: Freshwater transports in HadCM3, Clim. Dynam., 21, 177–195, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-003-0324-6, 2003. · DOI
  75. Pope, V. D., Gallani, M. L., Rowntree, P. R., and Stratton, R. A.: The impact of new physical parametrizations in the Hadley Centre climate model: HadAM3, Clim. Dynam., 16, 123–146, https://doi.org/10.1007/s003820050009, 2000. · DOI
  76. Redi, M. H.: Oceanic Isopycnal Mixing by Coordinate Rotation, J. Phys. Oceanogr., 12, 1154–1158, https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0485(1982)012<1154:OIMBCR>2.0.CO;2, 1998. · DOI
  77. Reichler, T. and Kim, J.: How well do coupled models simulate today's climate?, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 89, 303–311, https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-89-3-303, 2008. · DOI
  78. Ridgwell, A., Singarayer, J. S., Hetherington, A. M., and Valdes, P. J.: Tackling Regional Climate Change By Leaf Albedo Bio-geoengineering, Curr. Biol., 19, 146–150, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2008.12.025, 2009. · DOI
  79. Ridley, J. K., Huybrechts, P., Gregory, J. M., and Lowe, J. A.: Elimination of the Greenland ice sheet in a high CO2 climate, J. Climate, 18, 3409–3427, https://doi.org/10.1175/Jcli3482.1, 2005. · DOI
  80. Roberts, C. D., Garry, F. K., and Jackson, L. C.: A Multimodel Study of Sea Surface Temperature and Subsurface Density Fingerprints of the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation, J. Climate, 26, 9155–9174, https://doi.org/10.1175/Jcli-D-12-00762.1, 2013. · DOI
  81. Roberts, W. H. G. and Valdes, P. J.: Green Mountains and White Plains: the effect of Northern Hemisphere ice sheets on the global energy budget, J. Climate., 30, 3887–3905, https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-15-0846.1, 2017. · DOI
  82. Roberts, W. H. G., Valdes, P. J., and Payne, A. J.: Topography's crucial role in Heinrich Events, P. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 111, 16688–16693, https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1414882111, 2014. · DOI
  83. Balan Sarojini, B., Gregory, J. M., Tailleux, R., Bigg, G. R., Blaker, A. T., Cameron, D. R., Edwards, N. R., Megann, A. P., Shaffrey, L. C., and Sinha, B.: High frequency variability of the Atlantic meridional overturning circulation, Ocean Sci., 7, 471–486, https://doi.org/10.5194/os-7-471-2011, 2011. · DOI
  84. Schaller, N., Kay, A. L., Lamb, R., Massey, N. R., van Oldenborgh, G. J., Otto, F. E. L., Sparrow, S. N., Vautard, R., Yiou, P., Ashpole, I., Bowery, A., Crooks, S. M., Haustein, K., Huntingford, C., Ingram, W. J., Jones, R. G., Legg, T., Miller, J., Skeggs, J., Wallom, D., Weisheimer, A., Wilson, S., Stott, P. A., and Allen, M. R.: Human influence on climate in the 2014 southern England winter floods and their impacts, Nature Clim. Change, 6, 627–634, https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate2927, 2016. · DOI
  85. Sijp, W. P.: Characterising meridional overturning bistability using a minimal set of state variables, Clim. Dynam., 39, 2127–2142, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-011-1249-0, 2012. · DOI
  86. Simmons, A. J. and Strüfing, R.: Numerical forecasts of stratospheric warming events using a model with a hybrid vertical coordinate, Q. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc., 109, 81–111, https://doi.org/10.1002/qj.49710945905, 1983. · DOI
  87. Singarayer, J. S. and Valdes, P. J.: High-latitude climate sensitivity to ice-sheet forcing over the last 120 kyr, Quaternary Sci. Rev., 29, 43–55, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.quascirev.2009.10.011, 2010. · DOI
  88. Singarayer, J. S., Ridgwell, A., and Irvine, P.: Assessing the benefits of crop albedo bio-geoengineering, Environ. Res. Lett., 4, 045110, https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/4/4/045110, 2009. · DOI
  89. Sitch, S., Huntingford, C., Gedney, N., Levy, P. E., Lomas, M., Piao, S. L., Betts, R., Ciais, P., Cox, P. M., Friedlingstein, P., Jones, C. D., Prentice, I. C., and Woodward, F. I.: Evaluation of the terrestrial carbon cycle, future plant geography and climate-carbon cycle feedbacks using five Dynamic Global Vegetation Models (DGVMs), Glob. Change Biol., 14, 2015–2039, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2486.2008.01626.x, 2008. · DOI
  90. Smeed, D., McCarthy, G., Rayner, D., Moat, B. I., Johns, W. E., Baringer, M., and Meinen, C. S.: Atlantic meridional overturning circulation observed by the RAPID-MOCHA-WBTS (RAPID-Meridional Overturning Circulation and Heatflux Array-Western Boundary Time Series) array at 26N from 2004 to 2014, British Oceanographic Data Centre – Natural Environment Research Council, UK, https://doi.org/10/6qb, 2015.
  91. Smith, D. M., Cusack, S., Colman, A. W., Folland, C. K., Harris, G. R., and Murphy, J. M.: Improved Surface Temperature Prediction for the Coming Decade from a Global Climate Model, Science, 317, 796–799, https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1139540, 2007. · DOI
  92. Smith, D. M., Eade, R., Dunstone, N. J., Fereday, D., Murphy, J. M., Pohlmann, H., and Scaife, A. A.: Skilful multi-year predictions of Atlantic hurricane frequency, Nat. Geosci., 3, 846–849, https://doi.org/10.1038/ngeo1004, 2010. · DOI
  93. Smith, R. S.: The FAMOUS climate model (versions XFXWB and XFHCC): description update to version XDBUA, Geosci. Model Dev., 5, 269–276, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-5-269-2012, 2012. · DOI
  94. Smith, R. S., Gregory, J. M., and Osprey, A.: A description of the FAMOUS (version XDBUA) climate model and control run, Geosci. Model Dev., 1, 53–68, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-1-53-2008, 2008. · DOI
  95. Spencer, H., Sutton, R., and Slingo, J. M.: El Niño in a Coupled Climate Model: Sensitivity to Changes in Mean State Induced by Heat Flux and Wind Stress Corrections, J. Climate, 20, 2273–2298, https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI4111.1, 2007. · DOI
  96. Stainforth, D. A., Aina, T., Christensen, C., Collins, M., Faull, N., Frame, D. J., Kettleborough, J. A., Knight, S., Martin, A., Murphy, J. M., Piani, C., Sexton, D., Smith, L. A., Spicer, R. A., Thorpe, A. J., and Allen, M. R.: Uncertainty in predictions of the climate response to rising levels of greenhouse gases, Nature, 433, 403–406, https://doi.org/10.1038/nature03301, 2005. · DOI
  97. Stott, P. A. and Kettleborough, J. A.: Origins and estimates of uncertainty in predictions of twenty-first century temperature rise, Nature, 416, 723–726, 2002. · DOI
  98. Stott, P. A., Tett, S. F. B., Jones, G. S., Allen, M. R., Mitchell, J. F. B., and Jenkins, G. J.: External control of 20th century temperature by natural and anthropogenic forcings, Science, 290, 2133–2137, 2000. · DOI · Paper page
  99. Svirezhev, Y. M.: Thermodynamics and ecology, Ecol. Model., 132, 11–22, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0304-3800(00)00301-X, 2000. · DOI
  100. Tett, S. F. B., Betts, R., Crowley, T. J., Gregory, J., Johns, T. C., Jones, A., Osborn, T. J., Öström, E., Roberts, D. L., and Woodage, M. J.: The impact of natural and anthropogenic forcings on climate and hydrology since 1550, Clim. Dynam., 28, 3–34, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-006-0165-1, 2006. · DOI
  101. Toniazzo, T., Collins, M., and Brown, J.: The variation of ENSO characteristics associated with atmospheric parameter perturbations in a coupled model, Clim. Dynam., 30, 643–656, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-007-0313-2, 2007. · DOI
  102. Trenberth, K. E. and Fasullo, J. T.: An apparent hiatus in global warming?, Earth's Future, 1, 19–32, https://doi.org/10.1002/2013EF000165, 2013. · DOI · Paper page
  103. Valdes, P. J., Beerling, D. J., and Johnson, C. E.: The ice age methane budget, Geophys. Res. Lett., 32, L02704, https://doi.org/10.1029/2004GL021004, 2005. · DOI
  104. Visbeck, M., Marshall, J., Haine, T., and Spall, M.: On the specification of eddy transfer coefficients in coarse resolution ocean circulation models, J. Phys. Oceanogr., 27, 381–402, 1997. · DOI
  105. Walters, D. N., Williams, K. D., Boutle, I. A., Bushell, A. C., Edwards, J. M., Field, P. R., Lock, A. P., Morcrette, C. J., Stratton, R. A., Wilkinson, J. M., Willett, M. R., Bellouin, N., Bodas-Salcedo, A., Brooks, M. E., Copsey, D., Earnshaw, P. D., Hardiman, S. C., Harris, C. M., Levine, R. C., MacLachlan, C., Manners, J. C., Martin, G. M., Milton, S. F., Palmer, M. D., Roberts, M. J., Rodríguez, J. M., Tennant, W. J., and Vidale, P. L.: The Met Office Unified Model Global Atmosphere 4.0 and JULES Global Land 4.0 configurations, Geosci. Model Dev., 7, 361–386, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-7-361-2014, 2014. · DOI
  106. Weaver, A. J., Sedlacek, J., Eby, M., Alexander, K., Crespin, E., Fichefet, T., Philippon-Berthier, G., Joos, F., Kawamiya, M., Matsumoto, K., Steinacher, M., Tachiiri, K., Tokos, K., Yoshimori, M., and Zickfeld, K.: Stability of the Atlantic meridional overturning circulation: A model intercomparison, Geophys. Res. Lett., 39, L20709, https://doi.org/10.1029/2012gl053763, 2012. · DOI
  107. White, A. A. and Bromley, R. A.: Dynamically consistent, quasi-hydrostatic equations for global models with a complete representation of the Coriolis force, Q. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc., 121, 399–418, https://doi.org/10.1002/qj.49712152208, 1995. · DOI
  108. Williams, J. H. T., Smith, R. S., Valdes, P. J., Booth, B. B. B., and Osprey, A.: Optimising the FAMOUS climate model: inclusion of global carbon cycling, Geosci. Model Dev., 6, 141–160, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-6-141-2013, 2013. · DOI
  109. Williams, J. H. T., Totterdell, I. J., Halloran, P. R., and Valdes, P. J.: Numerical simulations of oceanic oxygen cycling in the FAMOUS Earth-System model: FAMOUS-ES, version 1.0, Geosci. Model Dev., 7, 1419–1431, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-7-1419-2014, 2014. · DOI
  110. Williams, K. D., Harris, C. M., Bodas-Salcedo, A., Camp, J., Comer, R. E., Copsey, D., Fereday, D., Graham, T., Hill, R., Hinton, T., Hyder, P., Ineson, S., Masato, G., Milton, S. F., Roberts, M. J., Rowell, D. P., Sanchez, C., Shelly, A., Sinha, B., Walters, D. N., West, A., Woollings, T., and Xavier, P. K.: The Met Office Global Coupled model 2.0 (GC2) configuration, Geosci. Model Dev., 8, 1509–1524, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-8-1509-2015, 2015. · DOI
  111. Willmott, C. J., Rowe, C. M., and Mintz, Y.: Climatology of the terrestrial seasonal water cycle, J. Climatol., 5, 589–606, https://doi.org/10.1002/joc.3370050602, 1985. · DOI
  112. Wilson, M. F. and Henderson-Sellers, A.: A global archive of land cover and soils data for use in general circulation climate models, J. Climatol., 5, 119–143, https://doi.org/10.1002/joc.3370050202, 1985. · DOI
  113. Zhang, L. P. and Wang, C. Z.: Multidecadal North Atlantic sea surface temperature and Atlantic meridional overturning circulation variability in CMIP5 historical simulations, J. Geophys. Res.-Oceans, 118, 5772–5791, https://doi.org/10.1002/jgrc.20390, 2013. · DOI

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Valdes, P. J., Armstrong, E., Badger, M. P. S., Bradshaw, C. D., Bragg, F., Crucifix, M., Davies-Barnard, T., Day, J. J., Farnsworth, A., Gordon, C., Hopcroft, P. O., Kennedy, A. T., Lord, N. S., Lunt, D. J., Marzocchi, A., Parry, L. M., Pope, V., Roberts, W. H. G., Stone, E. J., Tourte, G. J. L., & Williams, J. H. T.
ORCID
Venue
Geoscientific Model Development
Publisher
Copernicus GmbH
Published
2017-10-12
Volume
10
Issue
10
Pages
3715-3743
ISSN
1991-9603
DOI
10.5194/gmd-10-3715-2017
Cited by
286
References
3
Language
en
Licence
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/ (vor)

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