Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 508

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 84 of the 84 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Max Planck Institute Earth System Model (MPI-ESM1.2) for the High-Resolution Model Intercomparison Project (HighResMIP)

Open access
Gutjahr, Oliver, Putrasahan, Dian, Lohmann, Katja, Jungclaus, Johann H., von Storch, Jin-Song, Brüggemann, Nils, Haak, Helmuth, Stössel, Achim·2019·Geoscientific Model Development

Abstract

Abstract. As a contribution towards improving the climate mean state of the atmosphere and the ocean in Earth system models (ESMs), we compare several coupled simulations conducted with the Max Planck Institute for Meteorology Earth System Model (MPI-ESM1.2) following the HighResMIP protocol. Our simulations allow to analyse the separate effects of increasing the horizontal resolution of the ocean (0.4 to 0.1∘) and atmosphere (T127 to T255) submodels, and the effects of substituting the Pacanowski and Philander (PP) vertical ocean mixing scheme with the K-profile parameterization (KPP). The results show clearly distinguishable effects from all three factors. The high resolution in the ocean removes biases in the ocean interior and in the atmosphere. This leads to the important conclusion that a high-resolution ocean has a major impact on the mean state of the ocean and the atmosphere. The T255 atmosphere reduces the surface wind stress and improves ocean mixed layer depths in both hemispheres. The reduced wind forcing, in turn, slows the Antarctic Circumpolar Current (ACC), reducing it to observed values. In the North Atlantic, however, the reduced surface wind causes a weakening of the subpolar gyre and thus a slowing down of the Atlantic meridional overturning circulation (AMOC), when the PP scheme is used. The KPP scheme, on the other hand, causes stronger open-ocean convection which spins up the subpolar gyres, ultimately leading to a stronger and stable AMOC, even when coupled to the T255 atmosphere, thus retaining all the positive effects of a higher-resolved atmosphere.

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-12-3241-2019

Cites

84 of 84 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

Show all 84 references

Cited by

See all 508

Metadata

Authors
Gutjahr, O., Putrasahan, D., Lohmann, K., Jungclaus, J. H., von Storch, J.-S., Brüggemann, N., Haak, H., & Stössel, A.
Venue
Geoscientific Model Development
Published
2019-07-25
Volume
12
Issue
7
Pages
3241-3281
ISSN
  • 1991-959X (ISSN-L)
  • 1991-9603
OpenAlex
W2903911135
Cited by
508
References
84
FWCI
22.31
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
gold

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Max Planck Institute Earth System Model (MPI-ESM1.2) for the High-Resolution Model Intercomparison Project (HighResMIP). https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.5194/gmd-12-3241-2019
The paper
Gutjahr, O., Putrasahan, D., Lohmann, K., Jungclaus, J. H., von Storch, J.-S., Brüggemann, N., Haak, H., & Stössel, A. (2019). Max Planck Institute Earth System Model (MPI-ESM1.2) for the High-Resolution Model Intercomparison Project (HighResMIP). Geoscientific Model Development. https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-3241-2019

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.