Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 204

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

Representation of the Community Earth System Model (CESM1) CAM4-chem within the Chemistry-Climate Model Initiative (CCMI)

Open access
Tilmes, Simone, Lamarque, Jean-Francois, Emmons, Louisa K., Kinnison, Doug E., Marsh, Dan, Garcia, Rolando R., Smith, Anne K., Neely, Ryan R., Conley, Andrew, Vitt, Francis, Val Martin, Maria, Tanimoto, Hiroshi, Simpson, Isobel, Blake, Don R., Blake, Nicola·2016·Geoscientific Model Development

Abstract

Abstract. The Community Earth System Model (CESM1) CAM4-chem has been used to perform the Chemistry Climate Model Initiative (CCMI) reference and sensitivity simulations. In this model, the Community Atmospheric Model version 4 (CAM4) is fully coupled to tropospheric and stratospheric chemistry. Details and specifics of each configuration, including new developments and improvements are described. CESM1 CAM4-chem is a low-top model that reaches up to approximately 40 km and uses a horizontal resolution of 1.9° latitude and 2.5° longitude. For the specified dynamics experiments, the model is nudged to Modern-Era Retrospective Analysis for Research and Applications (MERRA) reanalysis. We summarize the performance of the three reference simulations suggested by CCMI, with a focus on the last 15 years of the simulation when most observations are available. Comparisons with selected data sets are employed to demonstrate the general performance of the model. We highlight new data sets that are suited for multi-model evaluation studies. Most important improvements of the model are the treatment of stratospheric aerosols and the corresponding adjustments for radiation and optics, the updated chemistry scheme including improved polar chemistry and stratospheric dynamics and improved dry deposition rates. These updates lead to a very good representation of tropospheric ozone within 20 % of values from available observations for most regions. In particular, the trend and magnitude of surface ozone is much improved compared to earlier versions of the model. Furthermore, stratospheric column ozone of the Southern Hemisphere in winter and spring is reasonably well represented. All experiments still underestimate CO most significantly in Northern Hemisphere spring and show a significant underestimation of hydrocarbons based on surface observations.

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-9-1853-2016

Cites

3 of 3 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 3 references

Cited by

See all 204

Metadata

Authors
Tilmes, S., Lamarque, J.-F., Emmons, L. K., Kinnison, D. E., Marsh, D., Garcia, R. R., Smith, A. K., Neely, R. R., Conley, A., Vitt, F., Val Martin, M., Tanimoto, H., Simpson, I., Blake, D. R., & Blake, N.
Venue
Geoscientific Model Development
Published
2016-05-20
Volume
9
Issue
5
Pages
1853-1890
ISSN
  • 1991-959X (ISSN-L)
  • 1991-9603
OpenAlex
W2314333762
Cited by
204
References
3
FWCI
12.08
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: Representation of the Community Earth System Model (CESM1) CAM4-chem within the Chemistry-Climate Model Initiative (CCMI). https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.5194/gmd-9-1853-2016
The paper
Tilmes, S., Lamarque, J.-F., Emmons, L. K., Kinnison, D. E., Marsh, D., Garcia, R. R., Smith, A. K., Neely, R. R., Conley, A., Vitt, F., Val Martin, M., Tanimoto, H., Simpson, I., Blake, D. R., & Blake, N. (2016). Representation of the Community Earth System Model (CESM1) CAM4-chem within the Chemistry-Climate Model Initiative (CCMI). Geoscientific Model Development. https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-1853-2016

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.