0 Datasets
0 Files
Get instant academic access to this publication’s datasets.
Yes. After verification, you can browse and download datasets at no cost. Some premium assets may require author approval.
Files are stored on encrypted storage. Access is restricted to verified users and all downloads are logged.
Yes, message the author after sign-up to request supplementary files or replication code.
Join 50,000+ researchers worldwide. Get instant access to peer-reviewed datasets, advanced analytics, and global collaboration tools.
✓ Immediate verification • ✓ Free institutional access • ✓ Global collaborationJoin our academic network to download verified datasets and collaborate with researchers worldwide.
Get Free AccessBenchmarking climate model simulations against observations of the climate is core to the process of building realistic climate models and developing accurate future projections. However, in many cases, models do not match historical observations, particularly on regional scales. If there is a mismatch between modeled and observed climate features, should we necessarily conclude that our models are deficient? Using several illustrative examples, we emphasize that internal variability can easily lead to marked differences between the basic features of the model and observed climate, even when decades of model and observed data are available. This can appear as an apparent failure of models to capture regional trends or changes in global teleconnections, or simulation of extreme events. Despite a large body of literature on the impact of internal variability on climate, this acknowledgment has not yet penetrated many model evaluation activities, particularly for regional climate. We emphasize that using a single or small ensemble of simulations to conclude that a climate model is in error can lead to premature conclusions on model fidelity. A large ensemble of multidecadal simulations is therefore needed to properly sample internal climate variability in order to robustly identify model deficiencies and convincingly demonstrate progress between generations of climate models.
Shipra Jain, Adam A. Scaife, Theodore G. Shepherd, Clara Deser, Nick Dunstone, Gavin A. Schmidt, Kevin E Trenberth, Thea Turkington (2023). Importance of internal variability for climate model assessment. npj Climate and Atmospheric Science, 6(1), DOI: 10.1038/s41612-023-00389-0.
Datasets shared by verified academics with rich metadata and previews.
Authors choose access levels; downloads are logged for transparency.
Students and faculty get instant access after verification.
Type
Article
Year
2023
Authors
8
Datasets
0
Total Files
0
Language
English
Journal
npj Climate and Atmospheric Science
DOI
10.1038/s41612-023-00389-0
Access datasets from 50,000+ researchers worldwide with institutional verification.
Get Free Access