Understanding Differences between the Equatorial Pacific as Simulated by Two Coupled GCMs

Numerical experiments are performed to isolate the cause of differences between the simulations of SST in the low-latitude Pacific of two coupled atmosphere–ocean general circulation models, the Center for Ocean–Land–Atmosphere (COLA) coupled model and the NCAR Climate System Model (CSM). The COLA m...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of climate 2002-03, Vol.15 (5), p.449-469
1. Verfasser: Schneider, Edwin K.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 469
container_issue 5
container_start_page 449
container_title Journal of climate
container_volume 15
creator Schneider, Edwin K.
description Numerical experiments are performed to isolate the cause of differences between the simulations of SST in the low-latitude Pacific of two coupled atmosphere–ocean general circulation models, the Center for Ocean–Land–Atmosphere (COLA) coupled model and the NCAR Climate System Model (CSM). The COLA model produces a more realistic simulation of the annual cycle of SST and interannual SST variability. The CSM has the more realistic annual mean wind stress and east–west SST gradient. The approach to finding the causes of these differences is to systematically eliminate differences in the physical parameterizations and numerics of the two models, and to examine the effects of these changes on the simulations. The results indicate that the atmospheric models rather than the ocean models are primarily responsible for differences in the simulations. There is no dominant process in the atmospheric models that explains the differences; both physical parameterizations (convection, surface flux formulation, shortwave radiation) and numerical schemes (vertical structure, moisture advection scheme) have significant effects. The effects of the parameterization changes on the annual mean SST are linear and additive, although tuning can cause apparent nonlinearity. In terms of the effects that directly impact the ocean, the different physics and numerics of the atmospheric models change the net heat flux into the ocean and/or the sensitivity of the wind stress to SST. These properties can be estimated by AGCM-only simulations with observed SST. Flux correction is then used to identify the process responsible for the difference between the coupled simulations. Heat flux is found to produce most of the difference, and with the sign that would be expected from the heat budget of the mixed layer. However, the larger sensitivity of the NCAR atmospheric model wind stress has a significant impact on extending the cold tongue into the western equatorial Pacific.
doi_str_mv 10.1175/1520-0442(2002)015<0449:UDBTEP>2.0.CO;2
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>jstor_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_18373019</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><jstor_id>26249178</jstor_id><sourcerecordid>26249178</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c425t-ea5b32e94b36f72eeac213b0634a231a5eebaca10f6e5c6d17e8e073f6f20b763</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kdFq2zAUhs3YYFnXRxiIwUZ34fToyJLtbRQ6N8sGLSksudiVkJWjzcGxU8mm9O0nk9LBLnYlfunjPxx9SXLOYc55Ls-5REghy_AMAfADcPk5pvLj5urLenF7gXOYV6tP-CyZPZHPkxkUZZYWuZQvk1ch7AA4KoBZ8nPTbcmHwXTbpvvFrhrnyFNnKbCahnuijg2_iS3uRjP0vjEtuzW2cY1lJrAfzX5szUBbVj-w9X3Pqn48tDEuq5vwOnnhTBvo9PE8STZfF-vqW3q9Wn6vLq9Tm6EcUjKyFkhlVgvlciQyFrmoQYnMoOBGEtXGGg5OkbRqy3MqCHLhlEOocyVOkvfH3oPv70YKg943wVLbmo76MWheiFwALyN49n9QKZmVCGUR0bf_oLt-9F1cQyNi_MZSyAgtj5D1fQienD74Zm_8g-agJ1V6EqAnAXpSpaOqKZX6qErHG12tNMamd4_jTLCmdd50tgl_64QEKOQ08c2R24Uo4-kdFWYlzwvxB6-Dn_4</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>222875935</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Understanding Differences between the Equatorial Pacific as Simulated by Two Coupled GCMs</title><source>Jstor Complete Legacy</source><source>American Meteorological Society</source><source>Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals</source><creator>Schneider, Edwin K.</creator><creatorcontrib>Schneider, Edwin K.</creatorcontrib><description>Numerical experiments are performed to isolate the cause of differences between the simulations of SST in the low-latitude Pacific of two coupled atmosphere–ocean general circulation models, the Center for Ocean–Land–Atmosphere (COLA) coupled model and the NCAR Climate System Model (CSM). The COLA model produces a more realistic simulation of the annual cycle of SST and interannual SST variability. The CSM has the more realistic annual mean wind stress and east–west SST gradient. The approach to finding the causes of these differences is to systematically eliminate differences in the physical parameterizations and numerics of the two models, and to examine the effects of these changes on the simulations. The results indicate that the atmospheric models rather than the ocean models are primarily responsible for differences in the simulations. There is no dominant process in the atmospheric models that explains the differences; both physical parameterizations (convection, surface flux formulation, shortwave radiation) and numerical schemes (vertical structure, moisture advection scheme) have significant effects. The effects of the parameterization changes on the annual mean SST are linear and additive, although tuning can cause apparent nonlinearity. In terms of the effects that directly impact the ocean, the different physics and numerics of the atmospheric models change the net heat flux into the ocean and/or the sensitivity of the wind stress to SST. These properties can be estimated by AGCM-only simulations with observed SST. Flux correction is then used to identify the process responsible for the difference between the coupled simulations. Heat flux is found to produce most of the difference, and with the sign that would be expected from the heat budget of the mixed layer. However, the larger sensitivity of the NCAR atmospheric model wind stress has a significant impact on extending the cold tongue into the western equatorial Pacific.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0894-8755</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1520-0442</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1175/1520-0442(2002)015&lt;0449:UDBTEP&gt;2.0.CO;2</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Boston, MA: American Meteorological Society</publisher><subject>Atmosphere ; Atmospheric general circulation models ; Atmospheric models ; Atmospheric moisture ; Climate ; Climate models ; Climate system ; Cost of living adjustments ; Earth, ocean, space ; Exact sciences and technology ; External geophysics ; Marine ; Modeling ; Oceans ; Parameterization ; Physics of the oceans ; Precipitation ; Sea-air exchange processes ; Simulations</subject><ispartof>Journal of climate, 2002-03, Vol.15 (5), p.449-469</ispartof><rights>2002 American Meteorological Society</rights><rights>2002 INIST-CNRS</rights><rights>Copyright American Meteorological Society Mar 1, 2002</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c425t-ea5b32e94b36f72eeac213b0634a231a5eebaca10f6e5c6d17e8e073f6f20b763</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/26249178$$EPDF$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/26249178$$EHTML$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,799,3668,27901,27902,57992,58225</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&amp;idt=13500855$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Schneider, Edwin K.</creatorcontrib><title>Understanding Differences between the Equatorial Pacific as Simulated by Two Coupled GCMs</title><title>Journal of climate</title><description>Numerical experiments are performed to isolate the cause of differences between the simulations of SST in the low-latitude Pacific of two coupled atmosphere–ocean general circulation models, the Center for Ocean–Land–Atmosphere (COLA) coupled model and the NCAR Climate System Model (CSM). The COLA model produces a more realistic simulation of the annual cycle of SST and interannual SST variability. The CSM has the more realistic annual mean wind stress and east–west SST gradient. The approach to finding the causes of these differences is to systematically eliminate differences in the physical parameterizations and numerics of the two models, and to examine the effects of these changes on the simulations. The results indicate that the atmospheric models rather than the ocean models are primarily responsible for differences in the simulations. There is no dominant process in the atmospheric models that explains the differences; both physical parameterizations (convection, surface flux formulation, shortwave radiation) and numerical schemes (vertical structure, moisture advection scheme) have significant effects. The effects of the parameterization changes on the annual mean SST are linear and additive, although tuning can cause apparent nonlinearity. In terms of the effects that directly impact the ocean, the different physics and numerics of the atmospheric models change the net heat flux into the ocean and/or the sensitivity of the wind stress to SST. These properties can be estimated by AGCM-only simulations with observed SST. Flux correction is then used to identify the process responsible for the difference between the coupled simulations. Heat flux is found to produce most of the difference, and with the sign that would be expected from the heat budget of the mixed layer. However, the larger sensitivity of the NCAR atmospheric model wind stress has a significant impact on extending the cold tongue into the western equatorial Pacific.</description><subject>Atmosphere</subject><subject>Atmospheric general circulation models</subject><subject>Atmospheric models</subject><subject>Atmospheric moisture</subject><subject>Climate</subject><subject>Climate models</subject><subject>Climate system</subject><subject>Cost of living adjustments</subject><subject>Earth, ocean, space</subject><subject>Exact sciences and technology</subject><subject>External geophysics</subject><subject>Marine</subject><subject>Modeling</subject><subject>Oceans</subject><subject>Parameterization</subject><subject>Physics of the oceans</subject><subject>Precipitation</subject><subject>Sea-air exchange processes</subject><subject>Simulations</subject><issn>0894-8755</issn><issn>1520-0442</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2002</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>8G5</sourceid><sourceid>BEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>GUQSH</sourceid><sourceid>M2O</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kdFq2zAUhs3YYFnXRxiIwUZ34fToyJLtbRQ6N8sGLSksudiVkJWjzcGxU8mm9O0nk9LBLnYlfunjPxx9SXLOYc55Ls-5REghy_AMAfADcPk5pvLj5urLenF7gXOYV6tP-CyZPZHPkxkUZZYWuZQvk1ch7AA4KoBZ8nPTbcmHwXTbpvvFrhrnyFNnKbCahnuijg2_iS3uRjP0vjEtuzW2cY1lJrAfzX5szUBbVj-w9X3Pqn48tDEuq5vwOnnhTBvo9PE8STZfF-vqW3q9Wn6vLq9Tm6EcUjKyFkhlVgvlciQyFrmoQYnMoOBGEtXGGg5OkbRqy3MqCHLhlEOocyVOkvfH3oPv70YKg943wVLbmo76MWheiFwALyN49n9QKZmVCGUR0bf_oLt-9F1cQyNi_MZSyAgtj5D1fQienD74Zm_8g-agJ1V6EqAnAXpSpaOqKZX6qErHG12tNMamd4_jTLCmdd50tgl_64QEKOQ08c2R24Uo4-kdFWYlzwvxB6-Dn_4</recordid><startdate>20020301</startdate><enddate>20020301</enddate><creator>Schneider, Edwin K.</creator><general>American Meteorological Society</general><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7QH</scope><scope>7TG</scope><scope>7UA</scope><scope>7X2</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88F</scope><scope>88I</scope><scope>8AF</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FG</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AEUYN</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ARAPS</scope><scope>ATCPS</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BGLVJ</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>BKSAR</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>F1W</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>H96</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>KL.</scope><scope>L.G</scope><scope>M0K</scope><scope>M1Q</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>M2P</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>P5Z</scope><scope>P62</scope><scope>PATMY</scope><scope>PCBAR</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PYCSY</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>S0X</scope><scope>7TN</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20020301</creationdate><title>Understanding Differences between the Equatorial Pacific as Simulated by Two Coupled GCMs</title><author>Schneider, Edwin K.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c425t-ea5b32e94b36f72eeac213b0634a231a5eebaca10f6e5c6d17e8e073f6f20b763</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2002</creationdate><topic>Atmosphere</topic><topic>Atmospheric general circulation models</topic><topic>Atmospheric models</topic><topic>Atmospheric moisture</topic><topic>Climate</topic><topic>Climate models</topic><topic>Climate system</topic><topic>Cost of living adjustments</topic><topic>Earth, ocean, space</topic><topic>Exact sciences and technology</topic><topic>External geophysics</topic><topic>Marine</topic><topic>Modeling</topic><topic>Oceans</topic><topic>Parameterization</topic><topic>Physics of the oceans</topic><topic>Precipitation</topic><topic>Sea-air exchange processes</topic><topic>Simulations</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Schneider, Edwin K.</creatorcontrib><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Aqualine</collection><collection>Meteorological &amp; Geoastrophysical Abstracts</collection><collection>Water Resources Abstracts</collection><collection>Agricultural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Military Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>STEM Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Sustainability</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies &amp; Aerospace Collection</collection><collection>Agricultural &amp; Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>eLibrary</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Technology Collection</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Earth, Atmospheric &amp; Aquatic Science Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>ASFA: Aquatic Sciences and Fisheries Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>Aquatic Science &amp; Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) 2: Ocean Technology, Policy &amp; Non-Living Resources</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>Meteorological &amp; Geoastrophysical Abstracts - Academic</collection><collection>Aquatic Science &amp; Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) Professional</collection><collection>Agricultural Science Database</collection><collection>Military Database</collection><collection>Research Library</collection><collection>Science Database</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies &amp; Aerospace Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Advanced Technologies &amp; Aerospace Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Science Database</collection><collection>Earth, Atmospheric &amp; Aquatic Science Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>SIRS Editorial</collection><collection>Oceanic Abstracts</collection><jtitle>Journal of climate</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Schneider, Edwin K.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Understanding Differences between the Equatorial Pacific as Simulated by Two Coupled GCMs</atitle><jtitle>Journal of climate</jtitle><date>2002-03-01</date><risdate>2002</risdate><volume>15</volume><issue>5</issue><spage>449</spage><epage>469</epage><pages>449-469</pages><issn>0894-8755</issn><eissn>1520-0442</eissn><abstract>Numerical experiments are performed to isolate the cause of differences between the simulations of SST in the low-latitude Pacific of two coupled atmosphere–ocean general circulation models, the Center for Ocean–Land–Atmosphere (COLA) coupled model and the NCAR Climate System Model (CSM). The COLA model produces a more realistic simulation of the annual cycle of SST and interannual SST variability. The CSM has the more realistic annual mean wind stress and east–west SST gradient. The approach to finding the causes of these differences is to systematically eliminate differences in the physical parameterizations and numerics of the two models, and to examine the effects of these changes on the simulations. The results indicate that the atmospheric models rather than the ocean models are primarily responsible for differences in the simulations. There is no dominant process in the atmospheric models that explains the differences; both physical parameterizations (convection, surface flux formulation, shortwave radiation) and numerical schemes (vertical structure, moisture advection scheme) have significant effects. The effects of the parameterization changes on the annual mean SST are linear and additive, although tuning can cause apparent nonlinearity. In terms of the effects that directly impact the ocean, the different physics and numerics of the atmospheric models change the net heat flux into the ocean and/or the sensitivity of the wind stress to SST. These properties can be estimated by AGCM-only simulations with observed SST. Flux correction is then used to identify the process responsible for the difference between the coupled simulations. Heat flux is found to produce most of the difference, and with the sign that would be expected from the heat budget of the mixed layer. However, the larger sensitivity of the NCAR atmospheric model wind stress has a significant impact on extending the cold tongue into the western equatorial Pacific.</abstract><cop>Boston, MA</cop><pub>American Meteorological Society</pub><doi>10.1175/1520-0442(2002)015&lt;0449:UDBTEP&gt;2.0.CO;2</doi><tpages>21</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0894-8755
ispartof Journal of climate, 2002-03, Vol.15 (5), p.449-469
issn 0894-8755
1520-0442
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_18373019
source Jstor Complete Legacy; American Meteorological Society; Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals
subjects Atmosphere
Atmospheric general circulation models
Atmospheric models
Atmospheric moisture
Climate
Climate models
Climate system
Cost of living adjustments
Earth, ocean, space
Exact sciences and technology
External geophysics
Marine
Modeling
Oceans
Parameterization
Physics of the oceans
Precipitation
Sea-air exchange processes
Simulations
title Understanding Differences between the Equatorial Pacific as Simulated by Two Coupled GCMs
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-02T03%3A30%3A30IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-jstor_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Understanding%20Differences%20between%20the%20Equatorial%20Pacific%20as%20Simulated%20by%20Two%20Coupled%20GCMs&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20climate&rft.au=Schneider,%20Edwin%20K.&rft.date=2002-03-01&rft.volume=15&rft.issue=5&rft.spage=449&rft.epage=469&rft.pages=449-469&rft.issn=0894-8755&rft.eissn=1520-0442&rft_id=info:doi/10.1175/1520-0442(2002)015%3C0449:UDBTEP%3E2.0.CO;2&rft_dat=%3Cjstor_proqu%3E26249178%3C/jstor_proqu%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=222875935&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_jstor_id=26249178&rfr_iscdi=true